|
Français
|
Contact Us | Help | Search | Canada Site |
| Home Page | What's New | Research | Publications | Careers |
Employment Needs, Interests, and Programming for Women Offenders
2005 No R-166
Kendra Delveaux
Kelley Blanchette
and
Jacqueline Wickett
Research Branch
Correctional Service Canada
April 2005
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recent reviews of programs and services for women have raised concerns regarding the state of employment programming for federal women offenders in Canada . For instance, both the Auditor General's Report (2003) and the report of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (2003) mention several gaps in service delivery for women offenders, including the paucity of meaningful work opportunities and employment programs, as well as a lack of community-based work releases for women offenders. Correctional Services Canada (CSC) is currently in the process of developing an employment strategy for women. To inform the strategy, the aim of the present study was to provide a detailed description of current employment programs and services available to women offenders and to examine relevant aspects of women's employment history, needs, and interests.
A multi-method approach was used for the data collection process. First, information was gathered related to pre-incarceration employment history, current experience with CSC training/employment, employment intentions and interests, offender attitudes and beliefs regarding employment and employment-related abilities and resources, as well as offenders' suggestions for future employment programming for women. This information was obtained from offender files using an automated offender database (Offender Management System; OMS) and from questionnaires completed by women offenders in the institutions and in the community. Additional information was gathered through questionnaires and/or telephone interviews with institutional and community staff members. Specifically, staff perceptions of current employment programs and services for women, their attitudes towards employment of offenders, their observations regarding barriers to employment for women, and their suggestions for employment programming were investigated.
Results indicated that the majority of women offenders demonstrated employment needs at intake to federal institutions, particularly with respect to a high unemployment rate, the lack of skills, trade, or profession, and relatively low educational attainment. Employment needs were particularly notable among Aboriginal and younger women offenders, and were associated with needs in other domains, particularly criminal associates, substance abuse, and community functioning. Interestingly, women themselves did not report difficulties relating to employment to be a strong contributing factor to past criminal behaviour, but they considered assistance with employment related needs as quite important with respect to desistence of criminal activities in the future .
Only about one-third of women offenders reported employment to be a main source of income prior to incarceration. However, the majority (approximately 80%) reported at least some prior employment experience in the community, and the average reported salary was adequate, although the average salary reported by Aboriginal women prior to incarceration was significantly lower than that of non-Aboriginal women. Also, fewer younger then older women offenders reported that they were qualified for jobs that would allow them to make a salary sufficient to meet their basic needs.
Within CSC institutions, the majority of the women reported being employed and at least half of the incarcerated women who were working did express at least some degree of interest in and satisfaction with their current institutional placements. However, women offenders' interests span a broader variety of institutional employment opportunities and training than those in which they were currently or previously engaged. Specifically, despite moderate to high expressed interest in some areas (e.g., administration, care giver, construction), very few women had been provided with commensurate work placements within CSC institutions. Furthermore, although almost all women offenders reported interest in participating in work release, almost none ( n = 3) had actually experienced this opportunity.
Among women who were incarcerated or unemployed in the community at the time of the study, most reported that they did intend to find a job, and about half of those unemployed in the community reported that they were searching for a job at the time. Unfortunately, only about half of incarcerated women and about one-quarter of unemployed women in the community rated their likelihood of obtaining employment as ‘really good'.
Among women who were employed in the community at the time of the study, the most common areas for employment included sales and service, and business, finance, and administration. Overall, these women reported being moderately satisfied with their current employment and salaries, and fairly optimistic about their chances of keeping their jobs in the future. The majority reported that their current jobs were related to their work experience prior to incarceration, and women employed in the community reported little association between their current employment and past institutional training.
Overall, most women offenders appeared to be fairly confident in their abilities to engage in various job search activities and to conduct employment-related tasks. This view was shared by most institutional staff members. A fair number of staff members, however, did express some concerns that women might have other personal needs that would influence their ability or desire to work, or that current institutional employment opportunities and supervision might not provide adequate challenges to enable women to utilize their capabilities to the fullest.
In general, staff was very supportive of rehabilitative goals linked to employment programming for women. However, despite suggestions by a few staff members that there had been improvements in the area of employment programming for women recently, the majority of staff seemed to perceive several problems related to the current state of programming. Concerns were predominantly related to a deficiency of meaningful employment opportunities and training, a lack of resources, and some challenges related to the need to balance employment needs with other needs for institutional programming. Some also noted a potential requirement for additional dynamic security that might be associated with greater institutional employment training or placements. Notwithstanding, the majority reported being supportive of work releases for women offenders, at least for those who are assessed as low risk (e.g., minimum security).
Just over one-quarter of women offenders reported that they were caring for their children full-time in the home prior to incarceration and a little over one-third of respondents expected that their children would be living with them upon release. However, the majority of those who reported that they would have their children living with them upon release reported that they would have care-givers available to care for their children (mostly in the form of family members) should they decide to work. In addition, most women reported moderate to high support from family members finding or keeping employment and when faced with stressful work experiences. Similarly, relatively high social support, with respect to ties to other employed individuals and access to employment-related resources, was reported by women offenders. It is important to note, however, that incarcerated women and younger women reported fewer affective ties to employed individuals and that Aboriginal women offenders reported less access to employment-related resources and positive role models. Overall, women also reported knowledge of several sources of possible aid in obtaining employment or financial assistance, including various community services and agencies, as well as family or friends, and independent internet job searches.
About half of women offenders in the community reported some interest in accessing employment services, particularly those that might provide links to employers, or information regarding résumé writing, interview skills, or job-search techniques. Interestingly, aside from those women who reported that they did not need to use employment services in the community (i.e., already had job, could find one on their own, did not intend to work), the only other relatively commonly mentioned issue was the perception that no employment services were offered or available. A number of staff members also expressed some concerns regarding the availability of employment services in the community, reporting either a dearth of services in certain occupational areas (e.g., computers, trades), lack of resources for community employment programs, or few links between service areas or between offenders and employers. Despite some concerns about the current state of employment programming, however, community staff members did appear to be supportive of employment and employment-related programming for women offenders.
Women offenders were most likely to hear about Community Employment Centres through various community agencies (e.g., Community Residential Facilities or non-CSC agencies), and only a few reported learning about the Centres from the institutions or their parole officers. A few women reported using the Centres and data collected by CORCAN indicated that some women offenders had utilized centre services (e.g., counselling, résumé development, job search), and that a few women offenders had obtained jobs through the Centres. Some of the most common areas of employment obtained through the Centre by women were in sales and services as well as business, finance, and administration. CEC staff members also appeared to be relatively knowledgeable about women offenders' employment interests. In order to increase women's awareness and use of the Centres, staff suggested greater promotion of the Centres and the ability to offer more services to women offenders (e.g., computers, transportation, child-care, counsellor specifically for women).
The most common complaint raised by those who had visited the Centres was the inability to access jobs through the Centre, and the most common reason listed by women for their interest in using the Centres in the future was to obtain assistance getting a job or obtaining a job that would enable to the get a better wage. On the other hand, reasons for disinterest in using the Centres appeared to be fairly similar to their reasons for not using employment services in general (did not need assistance, had a job, did not intend to work). One other finding was observed specifically with reference to the CECs though, in that a few offenders reported a lack of interest in using the Centres due to a desire to disassociate from their criminal past or from CSC in general. Interestingly, a few other offenders expressed almost the opposite view, indicating a desire to use the CECs specifically because it might address issues related to the potential barrier posed by their criminal records (i.e., employers would already be aware of their criminal record and still be willing to hire them).
With respect to the benefits or disadvantages of employment, many offenders focused on the material or financial benefits to employment, although other advantages (e.g., increased self-esteem, positive relationships or regard from others, development of skills, social reintegration) were also mentioned fairly frequently by both offenders and staff. The most common disadvantages related to employment reported by offenders included having less time for their families or themselves or a high degree of work-related stress or responsibility. The most common barriers to employment as reported by both staff and offenders appeared to be the issue of their criminal record and the lack of necessary training or experience. Other issues that were mentioned as disadvantages or barriers to employment included practical concerns related to transportation or appropriate clothing, or the need for reliable child-care. It was interesting that child-care issues were noted as a barrier to employment by a large percentage of staff , but relatively few women offenders .
Conclusions and Recommendations
The information and suggestions provided by women and staff in the present study were utilized to develop recommendations for future directions in the domain of employment programming for women.
Women inmates should have the ability to explore and develop career plans and have access to meaningful employment opportunities and training. They should have the opportunity to explore their career interests and choices with a qualified staff member (e.g., employment counsellor). This exploration should go beyond a simple assessment of offenders' interests, to explore other aspects of the offenders' chosen careers, such as their existing abilities in the area, training or qualifications necessary for the job (e.g., education, certifications), demand for their career interests in the local job market, expected pay levels, and likely requirements for criminal background checks within their chosen profession. Exploration of these factors would allow women to make an informed career decision by enabling them to consider and weigh their interests, abilities, willingness to engage in various degrees of training, or their desire for a certain lifestyle (i.e., salary level).
At the time of the writing of this report, most of the women's institutions were using some tools (e.g., COPS and CAPS) to assess women's occupational interests and abilities. It is imperative that these tools be used, not only to determine women's career interests, but also that the results of these assessments continue to have relevance for institutional employment programming. Results of assessment tools need to be used to direct employment programming and opportunities for women offenders, both on an individual basis (to determine work placements and training, educational upgrading required for the occupation for each woman) and on an institutional level (to determine most useful programs to implement based on the needs and interests of the institutional population). Consideration of career interests should begin as early in the process as possible (particularly for those with employment needs and short sentences), and then the focus should move toward providing access to training, education, or employment placements that are likely to further women's career interests.
Based on women's self-report data, training and work opportunities related to sales and services, business, finance, and administration, or trades, transport, and equipment operators would serve the employment needs and career interests of the greatest number of women. It is also important to note that while women reported past experience in sales and service, as well as business, finance, and administrative occupations, only a small percentage of women indicated that they had prior experience in the trades. Thus, it is likely that the greatest degree of training and experience would be required by those interested in trade-related occupations. Training may need to be provided at the most basic level for women interested in this type of work, gradually progressing to provide women with more advanced certifications, training, and skills over time.
It was also suggested that employment in the institutions was not comparable to work in the community, particularly with respect to work expectations (e.g., level of accountability, responsibility, hours of work, etc.). Thus, institutional staff and work supervisors should attempt to make the institutional work situation more similar (where possible) to that in the community, encouraging work skills such as punctuality, communication skills, ability to work positively with others, and so on. Importantly, CORCAN will soon be implementing an Employability Skills Program for women that will encourage the development of these skills in employment settings. The development of work skills and work ethic should be important in the context of all institutional employment placements, whether they constitute the provision of essential services within the institution or for CORCAN employment initiatives. In summary, an effort should be made to make sure that as many women offenders (or at least those with employment needs) are meaningfully employed within the institution and the work placements are realistic in terms of factors such as the number of hours required to do the job, work requirements and expectations, and so on.
It was also interesting to note some of the issues that women listed as disadvantages related to employment. For example, women reported that the need to work with difficult or unpleasant co-workers or employers as well as the added stress and responsibility were disadvantages associated with working. Therefore, it is possible that additional training related to managing relationships or dealing with stress would be useful for some women.
Results of the present study indicated that very few women participated in work releases in the community during incarceration. Given that more than one-third of women offenders are considered to be low risk to the public, and more than half are assessed as high motivation and high reintegration potential at intake to federal institutions, work releases should be utilized to a much greater degree.
In addition, certain subpopulations are over-represented among those with employment needs, particularly younger women offenders and Aboriginal women offenders. Thus institutions with large populations of these groups may wish to make special efforts to direct their programming to take into account factors that may be relevant to these populations (e.g., employment interests, learning styles, education levels). Moreover, it would be useful to designate additional programming or funding specifically for these populations in order to direct programming and services to areas or populations were it might be needed the most. Finally, it would be prudent to form links with other agencies or groups (e.g., Aboriginal organizations) to provide more specialized services for Aboriginal women in regions where a large number of Aboriginal women offenders are residing.
While offenders with longer sentences may be able to engage in a range of training and employment placements, the focus for offenders with shorter sentences with high needs in other domains may need to be on short-term training and certification that will provide them with some advantages in the community upon release. The Correctional Service of Canada is already providing certification courses in several areas that appear to be of interest to women (e.g., First Aid/CPR, computer/ technical training) but could possibly focus on increasing access to these courses for a higher proportion of women and providing training in other areas (e.g., cabinet/ furniture making, landscaping/ horticulture, welding) as well.
In order to implement some of the proposed programs and services, it is likely that additional resources (financial and staff) would be required. A number of institutional staff members suggested that they did not have enough staff to implement or appropriately supervise employment training or placements for women. Thus, it may be necessary to provide some additional funding to hire more staff to handle some of these tasks (e.g., career counselling, implementing and delivering certification programs, setting up employment placements in new occupational areas of interest to the institutional population, including work releases and developing relationships with community agencies or employers). It would seem prudent to designate at least one staff member, primarily or exclusively, to setting up or conducting the majority of these tasks. This person could also act as a primary contact person for employment initiatives within the institution with other individuals or organizations (e.g., CORCAN, CEC staff).
Overall, the goal should be to prepare women as much as possible for employment in the community while they are incarcerated . In reality, of course, this may not always be possible, particularly for women with short sentences and very high needs. As such, some women may still require further training in the community in order to improve their chances of gaining and maintaining meaningful employment. Given the small numbers of women offenders and their diverse locations around the country while on release, it would prove difficult to set up training programs specifically for federal women offenders in the community. While this may be possible in some areas with larger populations of women offenders, perhaps the most realistic goal for women who require further training in the community may be to connect them with existing community employment programs. In fact, it may be useful to solicit information from service providers in the community (e.g., CEC staff, parole officers) and to create a list of available employment programs in each region that could be updated at regular intervals. Final lists could them be redistributed to service providers in the institution and community who have frequent contact with offenders, ensuring that offenders and staff would have the best access to the most recent information possible regarding employment services for women in the community. In communities where appropriate programs are not available, another possible alternative might be to develop partnerships with other organizations to develop and offer programming that may be shared by federal women offenders and other individuals in the community with similar needs (e.g., male offenders, provincial women offenders).
In addition to needs related directly to employment, many staff and offenders discussed issues related to other criminogenic or personal needs that had to be addressed as well. Presumably, at least some progress will be made in addressing these needs during incarceration, but many women offenders will also need follow-up support in community (e.g., substance abuse prevention and maintenance, counselling, support-groups). Other issues that were reported as barriers to employment for women were factors more indirectly related to obtaining or maintaining employment, such as the availability of transportation or appropriate clothing for interviews or employment. Potential solutions to these issues include setting up a small fund for women who are experiencing difficulties in this area, or developing partnerships with other agencies or charitable organizations in the community who might provide financial or practical assistance (e.g., transportation to a job interview, provision of appropriate clothing).
The Community Employment Centres might be particularly important in strengthening links between the institution and community. For example, CEC staff could visit women's institutions to generate awareness about their services, and perhaps also develop contacts with offenders requiring employment services and assistance prior to release, so that offenders would be better prepared and be more comfortable accessing the Centres given the prior relationship that has been developed. Given some time to discuss offenders' needs and interests, it might even be possible to set up some potential employment contacts just prior to being released into the community, to enable offenders to establish links with employers immediately upon release.
It may also be important to establish more links with other organizations or agencies (e.g., Elizabeth Fry, Aboriginal organizations) in the community willing to help deliver employment services to women. As well, a resource list of existing agencies and programs delivering employment-related programming available to women offenders would be beneficial. This could be managed either nationally or regionally, updated on a yearly basis and then distributed to service providers in the institutions and community so that women could obtain information about any services that might be available to them in their releasing region from a variety of different sources.
At the time of the writing of this report (April, 2005), CORCAN was in the process of establishing official positions (to be “Managers, Employment and Employability”) with official job descriptions. Thus, one of the tasks of the individuals performing these jobs might be to foster greater communication across regions, particularly with respect to women's employment needs and programming, given the relative isolation of the institutions from one another.
While some degree of standardization of employment services might be beneficial, it also seems likely that given different institutional populations with potentially different needs and challenges (e.g., different ethnic populations, smaller versus larger populations) and potentially different labour market demands across various regions, some degree of flexibility and creativity in institutional employment programming will be necessary. However, communication between regions (by institutional employment staff, or employment coordinators) could foster the development of enthusiasm and creativity based on the sharing of information, ideas, and challenges related to employment programming for women offenders among employment staff who might otherwise be relatively isolated from one another due to geographic distance.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many individuals contributed to in a number of ways to this project. First, we would like to thank those who assisted with the data collection and coding of data, including Amey Bell, Mark Nafekh, Jillian Flight , Yvonne Stys, Robin Westmacott , as well as the large number of institutional and community staff members (too numerous to name) who assisted with the data collection and coordination for this project. Sincere thanks are expressed as well to Kelly Taylor and to Renée Gobeil for their editorial comments and to the Women Offenders' Sector staff for their input during the development phase of the project. Most of all, we would like to extend our sincere appreciation to all of the women and staff who contributed to the rich and detailed information that was collected for this report. Over the course of this research we spoke to many motivated and dedicated individuals; there were many who went “above and beyond the call of duty” in order to assist us in reaching just one more woman or completing just one more interview. Without your contributions this project would not have been possible
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EMPLOYMENT NEEDS, INTERESTS, AND PROGRAMMING FOR WOMEN OFFENDERS
Past and Current Employment and Training
Attitudes and Beliefs Regarding Employment
Community Services, Family, and Social Support for Employment
Offender Management System (OMS)
Women Offender Questionnaires: Institution and Community
Institutional Staff - General Employment Survey
Community Employment Centre Staff – Employment Questionnaire
Employment Indicators from the Offender Intake Assessment
Pre-Incarceration Employment History: Questionnaire Respondents
Offender Institutional Employment and Interests
Offender Management System: Institutional Education, Vocational Training, and Employment
Questionnaire Respondents: Institutional Training, Employment, and Interests
Staff Beliefs and Attitudes Regarding Institutional Employment Programming
Employment Programming Assignment and Perceived Interests
Development and Standardization of Employment Programming
Availability of Employment Programming
Difficulties/Challenges Associated with Delivery of Institutional Employment Programs
Resistance to Institutional Employment Programming
Support for Work Releases and Community Involvement in Institutional Employment
Community: Employment, Interests, and Beliefs
Beliefs Regarding Women Offender's Occupational Abilities
Women Offender Self-Reported Capabilities
Institutional Staff Members' Beliefs Regarding Women Offenders' Employment Capabilities
Relationships, Families, and Social Support
Living Arrangements and Child Care
Employment Services/Programs in the Community
Interest in and Use of Employment Services by Women Offenders
Awareness of Employment Services in the Community
Availability and Difficulties Associated with Community Employment Programming
Support for or Resistance to Community Employment or Programs
Focus on Community Employment Centres
Awareness of Community Employment Centres
Client Base and Women Offenders' Use of the Centres
Staff Reports of Women Offenders Employment Needs and Interests
Links, Communication, and Standardization across Services Areas
Links and Similarity between Institution and Community Employment
CORCAN Regional/National Staff: Roles and Links/Communication
Beliefs Regarding Importance, Advantages, and Barriers to Employment
Advantages and Disadvantages of Employment
Suggestions for the Future of Employment Programming for Women
Employment Training/Opportunities
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Employment Training and Opportunities
Assisting Women to Obtain Employment
Communication/Links between Different Areas or Service Providers
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Description of Total Number of Offenders and Staff Included in the Study.
Table 2: Ethnicity of Women Offenders based on Offender Management System Data (May 1, 2004) and Questionnaire Sample.
Table 3: Percentage of Women Serving Federal Sentences (May 1 st , 2004) with various Need, Risk, Motivation, and Reintegration Potential Profiles at Intake and at Release.
Table 4: Number and Percentage of Women Offenders with Identified Employment Needs at Intake to Federal Institutions.
Table 5: Criminogenic Needs at Intake for Women Offenders Incarcerated or on Release in the Community on May 1 st , 2004 (N = 773).
Table 6: Percentage of Women Offenders Reporting the Following Factors Contributing to Criminal Behaviour and Factors to Address to Help Desist from Criminal Actions (n = 89).
Table 7: Inter-correlations between Need Domains at Intake for Women Offenders Incarcerated or on Release in the Community on May 1 st , 2004 (N = 773).
Table 8: Number (Percentage) of Women Reporting Most Recent Job Prior to Incarceration in each of the Major Occupational Groups.
Table 9: Number (Percentage) of Women Reporting Qualifications for Jobs with Sufficient Salaries (to meet basic needs) in each of the Major Occupational Groups.
Table 10: Degree of Support for Work Releases and Involvement of External Agencies in Employment Programming
Table 11: Staff Ratings of Importance for Goals Regarding Employment Programming N = 51.
Table 12: Degree of Support for Rehabilitative or Profit Orientations towards Employment Programming, N = 51.
Table 13: Number (Percentage) of Women Inmates Reporting Career Interests in Various Occupational Areas 63
Table 14: Number of Women in the Community Sample with a Current Job or Searching for a Job in various Occupational Categories.
Table 15: Current (Community Women) or Expected (Incarcerated Women) Living Arrangements on Release.
Table 16: Sources of Information About the Employment Centres Reported by Community Women Offenders and CEC Staff
Table 17: Services Used by Women Offenders at the Community Employment Centres (CECs) as reported by CEC staff.
Table 18: Number (Percentage) of Community Employment Centre (CEC) Staff (n = 11) Reporting That Women Search For and Obtain Employment through the CECs in Each of the Occupational Categories.
Table 19: Number of Women Offenders and Community Employment Centre Staff Reporting the Following Reasons Why Women Might Not Utilize the CECs
Table 20: Links and Similarity between Institutional and Community Employment Reported by Institutional Staff Questionnaire Respondents (N = 51)
Table 21: Advantages of Employment for Women Offenders Reported by Offenders and Staff.
Table 22: Disadvantages Related to Employment Reported by Women Offenders .
Table 23: Barriers or Challenges to Meaningful Employment for Women Offenders Reported by Offenders and Community Staff.
Table 24: Suggestions for Prospective Employment Programming for Women
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Percentage of Women Offenders in the Institutions and Community with Employment Needs at Intake
Figure 2: Percentage of Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Women Offenders with Employment Needs at Intake
Figure 3: Percentage of Younger and Older Women Offenders with Employment Needs at Intake
Figure 4: Percentage of Vocational Training Placements Completed (n = 155) in each Area by Women Offenders.
Figure 5: Percentage of Institutional Work Placements (n = 249) in each Area for Women Offenders.
Figure 6: Top 15 Training Interests Reported with the Greatest Frequency and Actual Training Completed by Incarcerated Women Offenders (n = 58)
Figure 7: Top 15 Institutional Employment Reported with the Greatest Frequency and Actual Employment Reported by Incarcerated Women Offenders (n = 58)
Figure 8: Degree of Affective Ties to Other Employed Individuals Reported by Community and Incarcerated Samples.
Figure 9: Degree of Affective Ties to Other Employed Individuals Reported by Older and Younger Women Offenders.
Figure 10: Degree of Access to Employment-Related Resources and Models Reported by Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Women Offenders.
Figure 11: Degree of Importance of Employment Programming Reported by Offenders (Incarcerated and Community) and Offender Perceptions of Staff Beliefs Regarding the Importance of Employment Programming.
Figure 12: Degree of Importance of Employment Programming Reported by Staff (Institution and Community Parole Officers) and Staff Perceptions of Others' Beliefs Regarding the Importance of Employment Programming.
EMPLOYMENT NEEDS, INTERESTS, AND PROGRAMMING FOR WOMEN OFFENDERS
Risk and need assessment forms the basis for many decisions within Correctional Service Canada, including those related to release, and to correctional programming and other intervention. Many offenders have a variety of “criminogenic needs”, or dynamic attributes, which if addressed, may significantly reduce chances of re-offending (Andrews & Bonta, 1998). Therefore, by using a standardized assessment of offender needs, correctional staff may efficiently direct effective interventions for offenders. Correctional Service Canada currently uses two processes to assess offenders' needs: the Dynamic Factor Identification and Analysis (DFIA) which is conducted as part of the Offender Intake Assessment Process and the Community Intervention Scale which is completed at regular intervals for those completing their sentences in the community. These assessment tools provide a summary of offenders' needs in seven domains: employment, marital/family relations, associates/social interaction, substance abuse, community functioning, personality/emotional orientation, and attitudes.
Of interest in the current study were the employment needs of federal women offenders. Results of past research have indicated that the majority of women offenders demonstrated employment-related needs. For example, Motiuk and Blanchette (2000) reported that a large percentage of men (70%) and women (80%) had identified employment needs (some or considerable) at intake. However, this percentage dropped to 55% of men and 65% of women with employment needs after 12 months in the community. Similarly, Dowden, Serin, and Blanchette (2001) reported that the need domain that appeared to pose a problem for the largest proportion of women was the employment domain with 74% of women assessed as having need for improvement in this area within the first six months of release. However, only 53% of women who remained on release in the community for up to two years were noted as having difficulties in the employment arena. In a more recent study, Taylor & Flight (2005) provided a profile of all women offenders under supervision in the community in 2004. These researchers reported that 53% of the women offenders were rated as having either some or considerable need for improvement in the employment domain at intake, but only 39% were rated as needing improvement in this domain based on their most recent assessment in the community.
It is important to note, however, that the employment needs of Aboriginal women offenders may differ somewhat from those of non-Aboriginal women offenders. Dell and Boe (2000) reported that a greater percentage of Aboriginal women (53%) than Caucasian women offenders (25%) were identified as having considerable need in the employment domain at intake. In addition, Dowden and Serin (2000) reported that approximately three-quarters of Aboriginal federal women offenders were rated as having some degree of employment needs during the first six months in the community (which is similar to that reported by Dowden et al., 2001, for the entire sample of women offenders). However, there was no significant difference in the percentage of Aboriginal women with some degree of employment need in the community at the time of the two-year follow-up, whereas Dowden et al. (2001) reported that the percentage of the general population of women with employment needs who remained in the community for up to two years declined . Thus, it may be that more Aboriginal women have employment needs, or that these needs are less likely to be addressed in the community.
Overall, a relatively large percentage of women offenders appear to have employment needs both at intake to federal institutions and on release in the community. In addition, results of other research have found some support for the link between employment and recidivism. For example, results of a meta-analysis conducted by Gendreau, Goggin, and Gray (1999), indicated that the employment domain was a moderately strong predictor of recidivism. Others have reported at least moderate evidence for an association with recidivism more specifically for women offenders. For example, Blanchette and Motiuk (1995) reported that a poor employment history prior to incarceration was associated with both general and violent re-offending among a sample of federal women offenders, although Dowden, Serin, and Blanchette (2001) reported that employment need assessed in the community was associated with general, but not violent recidivism. In addition, Blanchette (1996) provided some evidence to suggest that employment need was associated with return to custody in general, and more specifically with revocations for technical violations, for a sample of federal women offenders. Furthermore, results of a recent and comprehensive study of women's needs have demonstrated perhaps the most convincing evidence of the link between employment and recidivism to date. Law (2004) reported that employment need on release in the community was associated with general, but not violent recidivism. In addition, employment and negative associates in the community were found to be two of the strongest predictors of success or failure in the community for women offenders.
Some links between employment and recidivism have also been demonstrated among provincial women offenders. For example, Lambert and Madden (1976) found that employment status prior to incarceration and upon release to the community was related to recidivism for provincial women offenders in Ontario, with those reporting stable employment evidencing lower levels of recidivism. These researchers also reported that the over-all recidivism rate for those with prior criminal records was 46%; however, this rate was only 15% for women with criminal records who were also employed during the first year following release. Similarly, Rettinger (1998) reported that a combined “education and employment” variable was related to general and violent recidivism. Results also indicated that women who recidivated violently scored higher than women who recidivated non-violently on level of need in the education/employment domain.
It should be noted, however, that support for the link between employment and recidivism has not been found by all. For example, Bonta, Pang, and Wallace-Capretta (1995) found little evidence of any association between employment history and recidivism for Canadian women offenders within a three-year follow-up period. These researchers did acknowledge that the sample size was small, and may have adversely affected their ability to obtain significant results. Finally, Dowden and Serin (2000) reported that employment needs were not associated with post-release outcome for Aboriginal federal offenders. However, Dowden and Serin (2000) acknowledged that the Aboriginal sample size was quite small and the base rate for recidivism in general was low, which may have influenced the ability to detect significant associations. Thus, it would appear that more research is needed to determine the influence of employment on post-release outcome for Aboriginal women before any firm conclusions should be drawn in this area.
Collectively, results of research have demonstrated at least moderate evidence for a link between employment needs and recidivism among women offenders (Blanchette, 1996; Blanchette & Motiuk, 1995; Dowden et al., 2001; Lambert & Madden, 1976; Rettinger, 1998), although not necessarily for Aboriginal women (Dowden & Serin, 2000). Given the employment needs of women offenders and the link between employment and recidivism, programs designed to increase employment and employability for women offenders are important. Although the results of past research have demonstrated the effectiveness of some employment programs with respect to lower recidivism rates or longer survival times in the community for male program participants (e.g., Gillis, Motiuk, & Belcourt, 1998; Motiuk & Belcourt, 1996; Saylor & Gaes, 1996), less evidence of the effectiveness of employment programming has been observed for women offenders. For example, Bonta, Pang, and Wallace-Capretta (1995) found that self-reported participation in work programs was not associated with re-offending. However, interviews for the study were conducted in 1990, when relatively few work programs were available to women. The authors also stated that no evaluation of employment programs were conducted, and that if the programs were not well-designed, this could explain the lack of relationship with recidivism.
In addition, Dowden and Andrews (1999) conducted a meta-analysis to determine the relationship between treatment programs and recidivism rates based on studies that had been conducted with predominately-female or all-female samples. The authors created a category of "school/work" that included six studies involving a school treatment component and one that included vocational skills programming. Overall, results indicated no relationship between the school/work treatment domain and re-offending. However, it is difficult to draw conclusions with respect to employment programs based on this study, given that 1) relatively few studies related to this domain were included in the meta-analysis; 2) most of the studies were related to education and schooling as opposed to a work or employment component; and 3) no mention was made of the quality of the programs. Thus, it was difficult to determine whether the lack of significant findings reflected a true lack of association between employment and recidivism or was simply a function of one or more of the above-mentioned factors.
In summary, although at least moderate evidence has been presented to demonstrate the link between employment needs and recidivism, little evidence has generally been found for the effectiveness of employment interventions in decreasing recidivism for women offenders in particular. However, in most cases, little mention was made of the quality of the programs assessed. Thus, it will first be important to implement intensive employment programs designed specifically for women and their needs in order to determine whether well-designed correctional employment programs can positively influence post-release outcome for women.
Several recent reviews of programs and services for women have revealed concerns regarding the state of employment programming for federal women offenders in Canada. Both the Auditor General's Report (2003) and the report of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (2003) mention several gaps in service delivery for women offenders, including the paucity of meaningful work opportunities and employment programs, as well as a lack of community-based work releases for women offenders. Correctional Services Canada is currently in the process of developing an employment strategy for women. Thus, the aim of the present study was to provide a detailed description of current employment programs and services available to women offenders and to examine relevant aspects of women's employment history, needs, and interests, with the aim of providing information relevant to the development of an employment strategy for women.
In the recent past, several researchers have conceptualized employment needs much more broadly, including factors such as historical behavioural aspects of employment as well as employment-related attitudes, beliefs, or values (e.g., Brown, 2002; Gendreau, Goggin, & Gray, 1998; Gillis, 2002). In fact, Gillis found that several dynamic attitudinal/situational variables (e.g., intention to find a job, social support for employment, occupational self-efficacy) were associated with post-release employment outcomes. Furthermore, these factors are, in theory, dynamic and thus amenable to change. Thus, it is important to assess some of these dynamic factors to determine any need areas for women that might be addressed through future employment programming/interventions. For this reason, in the present study, the examination of women's employment needs was extended beyond a simple query of women's employment history to the assessment of other dynamic aspects of employment (e.g., occupational self-efficacy, social support for employment).
The Present Study
First, information was gathered related to pre-incarceration employment history, current experience with CSC training/employment, employment intentions and interests, offender attitudes and beliefs regarding employment and employment-related abilities and resources, as well as offenders' suggestions for future employment programming for women. This information was obtained from an automated offender database (Offender Management System) and from questionnaires completed by women offenders in the institutions and in the community. Additional information was solicited by means of questionnaires and/or telephone interviews with institutional and community staff members. Given their daily contact with offenders and related programming efforts, staff members were thought to be an important source of potentially valuable suggestions for programming in the area of employment. Thus, staff perceptions of current employment programs and services for women, their attitudes towards employment of offenders, their perceptions of barriers to employment for women, and their suggestions for employment programming were investigated. These aims are discussed in greater detail below.
Past and Current Employment and Training
A detailed assessment of women offenders' employment histories and needs was conducted based on file information and questionnaire data. Comorbidity of offender needs was also assessed (i.e., association between employment needs and other criminogenic needs) to determine any associated factors that might need to be addressed prior to or simultaneously with employment needs to facilitate successful employment outcomes. Women were also asked to provide information regarding any employment training or employment obtained during incarceration and the degree of satisfaction with these experiences. Women in the community provided information regarding current employment experience or current searches for employment. Finally, questions were included to determine whether employment in the community on release was related to any job training or experience obtained during incarceration.
Intentions and Interests
Intention to work or to find a job was one of the strongest predictors of employment related outcomes reported by Gillis (2002). A number of years ago, Shaw, Rodgers, Blanchette, Hattem, Thomas, and Tamarack (1991b) conducted a survey of Canadian women offenders on release in the community. Results indicated that most of the women on release (aside from those who wanted to look after their children or who were retired) reported that they wanted to find full-time employment. In addition, Shaw, Rodgers, Blanchette, Hattem, Thomas, and Tamarack (1991a) found that incarcerated women reported an interest in a large number of different types of courses and training, including computers, hairdressing, sewing, photography, printing, carpentry, mechanics, construction, welding, and masonry to name just a few. Incarcerated women also reported that they would like to gain marketable skills and take courses leading to certificates that would help them to obtain jobs in the community.
In order to provide a current assessment of women offenders' intentions and interests for employment, detailed information regarding women offenders' employment interests was obtained in the present study. First, women's intentions to work were determined. Second, women were asked about the types of employment and employment-related training that they would be interested in pursuing in the institution, and also upon eventual release to the community. It was deemed important to determine women's interests for employment in order to provide them with programming that would engage them, and that they would also be likely to pursue in the community. Third, employment interests were compared to opportunities for employment and training currently available to determine employment programming areas in need of further development for women.
Attitudes and Beliefs Regarding Employment
Several aspects of women's attitudes and beliefs regarding employment were assessed. First, offenders were asked to describe their feelings of self-efficacy for employment (or the degree to which they feel confident in their abilities to perform employment-related tasks). In addition, to gain a broader understanding of the needs and interests of women, their perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages related to employment were solicited. Women's responses to this question might provide information relevant to the needs of this population. Women were also asked to describe the degree to which they perceive employment programming to be important to them. Finally, women were asked to describe any difficulties they've had obtaining work in the past (barriers) and to provide their suggestions for improvement to employment programs at the institutional and community levels.
Community Services, Family, and Social Support for Employment
An overview of women offenders' family-related circumstances in the community, including place of residency, number of women with dependents, and perceived family support for employment was obtained. In addition, one of the strongest predictors of employment-related outcomes as well as criminal outcomes based on Gillis' (2002) study was social support for employment, Thus, perceived social support for employment, including the degree to which offenders affiliate with other employed individuals, as well as their knowledge and use of employment-related services in the community (including CORCAN Community Employment Centres) was assessed. Of additional interest were linkages between institution and community, and the perceived level of continuity and consistency between institutional and community employment programming and services.
Sub-Group Analysis
Some exploratory analyses were performed to examine group differences in the above factors (e.g., employment history, interests, attitudes, social support). First, some comparisons were performed to determine differences between incarcerated women and women on release in the community. Since results of recent research have suggested that employment programming might be effective for older, but not for younger offenders (Uggen, 2000), it was deemed relevant to compare the employment experiences of older versus younger women. In addition, Dowden and Serin (2000) reported some differential results for Aboriginal women in the employment domain. Thus, differences related to employment for Aboriginal versus non-Aboriginal offenders were assessed as well.
Staff Attitudes and Perceptions
In addition to the women themselves, other important sources of information were institutional and community staff members who work with women offenders on a daily basis. Given their extensive experience in the institution and extended contact with women offenders and programming needs/concerns, staff members might have important insights into the unique problems faced by women offenders in the area of employment and perhaps also the potential solutions. A second reason to obtain information regarding the opinions of staff members related to employment was the potential impact of staff attitudes toward offender employment to the success of these programs. It was considered important to determine whether staff attitudes were generally positive or negative towards employment programming to determine whether any impediments to successful employment programming might exist. As such, questionnaires and/or interviews were conducted with: institutional staff members, community parole officers, CORCAN Community Employment Centre Staff, and CORCAN Regional/National staff members.
Summary
Although some factors related to employment history are static and cannot be changed, other factors such as social support for employment, occupational self-efficacy, and even intentions to work are more dynamic in nature, and are therefore, in theory, susceptible to change given the appropriate interventions. Thus, all of the above factors are relevant to the development of an employment strategy for women in that they have the potential to direct employment training and interventions to the areas in which women have the greatest need. Moreover, a detailed examination of women's employment interests will be useful in determining the types of training, vocational, or industry programs to implement for women. Similarly, an examination of staff attitudes and perceptions of employment programming might also help to determine valuable directions for intervention or for positive change.
METHOD
Participants
Participant Summary
In order to provide a profile of the total offender population and their needs at intake and release to the community, a snapshot of the women offender population on May 1 st , 2004 was obtained from the automated offender data base (Offender Management System; OMS). In addition to file information, women offenders residing in federal institutions and in the community were asked to complete questionnaires to obtain more detailed information regarding women's offenders needs, interests, and perceptions related to current and future employment programming. Finally, staff perceptions and attitudes regarding employment programming or services in the institutions and community and their suggestions for future directions in the area were also solicited by means of interviews and/or questionnaires. A summary of the total number of staff and offender participants is presented in Table 1. This is followed by a more detailed description of demographic information for study participants.
Table 1: Description of Total Number of Offenders and Staff Included in the Study
|
OMS Data Snapshot (May 1 st , 2004) |
Questionnaires |
Telephone Interviews |
|---|---|---|---|
Offenders |
|
|
|
Institution |
384 |
58 |
|
Community |
459 |
34 |
|
Staff |
|
|
|
Institutional Staff |
|
51 |
18 |
Community Parole Officers |
|
|
11 |
CORCAN Regional/National Staff |
|
|
5 |
Community Employment Centre Staff |
|
13 |
1 |
Total Number |
843 |
156 |
35 |
Women Offenders: OMS Profile and Questionnaire Sample
The Offender Management System (OMS) is an electronic filing system used by CSC. Data obtained from OMS were used to construct a profile of women currently in federal institutions and on conditional release in the community for whom file data were available on May 1 st , 2004. This population included 384 incarcerated women and 459 women under supervision in the community on that date. In addition, 58 women offenders incarcerated in federal institutions and 34 women completing federal sentences in the community completed questionnaires providing additional information for the study 1.
Almost half of women serving federal sentences were either single or in a common-law relationship (see Appendix A for further information related to marital status of population and questionnaire sample). The average age of federal women offenders was 37.6 years, and women serving their sentences in the community (M = 39.1, SD = 11.5) tended to be somewhat older than incarcerated women (M = 35.7, SD = 11.5), t (1, 841) = -4.33, p < .001 2. Results obtained from the snapshot indicated that just over half of women offenders were Caucasian and almost one-quarter were Aboriginal. A breakdown of race (Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal) by data source is presented in Table 2.
Table 2: Ethnicity of Women Offenders based on Offender Management System Data (May 1, 2004) and Questionnaire Sample .
|
OMS Snapshot Data (n = 843) |
Questionnaire Sample (n = 92) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Ethnicity |
N |
% |
n |
% |
Caucasian |
496 |
59% |
49 |
53% |
Aboriginal |
186 |
22% |
23 |
25% |
Other or Not Reported |
161 |
19% |
20 |
22% |
1 This represented approximately 15% of the total federal institutional population and approximately 7% of the total community population based on the snapshot data from OMS on May 1 st , 2004 .
2 Community questionnaire participants were also somewhat older than incarcerated questionnaire respondents: community (M = 38.0, SD = 9.1), institution (M = 32.2, SD = 9.7), t (1, 89) = -2.84, p < .01.
The average sentence length for women offenders, excluding those with life sentences, was 4.2 years (SD = 3.0). Similar results were obtained for the questionnaire sample; questionnaire respondents reported an average sentence length of 4.5 years (SD = 3.4). Incarcerated questionnaire respondents also reported having served 2.6 years (SD = 3.4) of their sentences at the time of the study, and community questionnaire respondents reported an average of 19.6 months (SD = 37.1) on release in the community at the time of the study 3.
Most women who had been released to the community by the snapshot date had been released on day parole (72%), followed by full parole (15%), and statutory release (13%). At the time of data collection, the majority of community questionnaire respondents reported that they were on full parole (56%), followed by day parole (26%), and statutory release (18%). Additional offence information for the snapshot population and questionnaire respondents is provided in Appendix B.
Institutional and regional distributions for the women offender population and questionnaire sample are shown in Appendices C1 and C2, respectively. Note that there was representation among questionnaire respondents from all institutions and from all community regions with the possible 4 exception of the Pacific Region (community sample).
Staff
Interview and/or questionnaire data were obtained from institutional staff, community parole officers, CORCAN Regional/National staff, and Community Employment Centre staff. On average, staff members reported a fair degree of experience working in the field and working with women offenders (see Appendix D). More detailed information regarding these participants is provided below.
3 The majority of questionnaire respondents indicated that they were serving their first federal sentence (90%).
4 Region of residence was unknown for 6 women in the community, so it is possible that one or more of those six may have been residing in the Pacific Region at the time of the study.
Institutional Staff. Staff working in women's institutions completed questionnaires ( n = 51; 45 females) and participated in telephone interviews ( n = 18; 14 females) 5. Information regarding work location is presented in Appendix E. Questionnaires were returned and interviews were conducted with staff working in a broad range of roles including “front-line” staff, those involved with programming or mental health services, as well as a few participants involved in administrative work, institutional parole officers, and chaplains.
Community Parole Officers. Eleven female parole officers agreed to participate in a telephone interview. All regions were represented: Pacific ( n = 1), Prairies ( n = 3), Ontario ( n = 3), Quebec ( n = 1), and Atlantic ( n = 3). On average, parole officers who participated in interviews for the study reported that 59% of their clientele was female, with the actual percentage of female clients reported by different parole officers ranging from 1% to 100% of their total client population at the time of the study.
CORCAN Regional/National Staff. Of the five Employment Coordinators 6, four of them, as well as the Director of the Employment and Employability Program agreed to participate in a telephone interview. All of the interviewees were female.
Community Employment Centres. A total of 14 Community Employment Centre staff (9 females) participated in the study. Surveys 7 were completed and returned to the researchers by mail from 11 CSC Community Employment Centres 8. Responses were received from all regions: Pacific ( n = 1); Prairies ( n = 3); Ontario ( n = 3); Quebec ( n = 5); and Atlantic ( n = 2). The 11 respondents who indicated that they had previously worked with women offenders in their centres reported providing numerous services to women such as: job search, personal or employment counselling, résumé writing, interview preparation, assessment, skills training, as well as aide accessing financial assistance.
5 Note that some staff chose to complete both a questionnaire and an interview, while other staff members participated in only one aspect of the study design.
6 At the time that the data for the study was collected, there were 5 individuals who were filling the roles of “Employment Coordinators”, one in each region across the country. However, these positions were not officially established at the time. As of the time that this report was written, CORCAN was in the process of establishing official positions for this role, with clearly defined job descriptions. Once these positions are officially established and filled, those employed in this role will be called “Managers, Employment and Employability”.
7 One of the respondents expressed some interest in completing the survey items verbally, as opposed to written form. Thus, one of the surveys was completed in the form of a telephone interview.
8 At the time of the writing of this report there were 33 Community Employment Centres operating across the country.
Procedure
Initial contacts were made with institutional and community staff to describe the study and solicit participation by staff and offenders. Participation in the study was voluntary, and offenders and staff were provided with the option of completing questionnaires or interviews in the official language of their choice. All data (questionnaire, interview) were collected between February and July of 2004. An informed consent form was included on the front of all questionnaires, and interviewees were asked to provide verbal consent prior to participating in telephone interviews. Note that questionnaires were generally returned by mail to the Research Branch in the self-addressed, stamped envelopes provided. Interviews were transcribed based on written notes taken during the interview and/or tape-recordings of the interviews.
Institutions
Memos were sent to the Wardens of the Women's Institutions to inform them about the study and to ask them to appoint a contact person for the study at their respective institutions. The study was described and questionnaires were distributed to any staff or offenders who expressed an interest in participating. Questionnaires were distributed to interested offenders and staff members 9 by a researcher from National Headquarters or by a staff contact at the institutions. 10 In addition to the questionnaires, interviews were conducted with institutional staff members who wished to provide additional information regarding their perceptions and experiences related to institutional employment programming. Staff indicated their interest in participating in a telephone interview in two ways: by indicating their interest in an interview in response to a question on the front page of the staff questionnaire, or by responding to an email that was sent to key institutional staff members from the principal researcher 11.
9Staff members were also given the opportunity to complete the questionnaire electronically and to return it by email to the principal researcher.
10 Due to operational funding constraints, it was not possible for the researchers to travel to each of the locations. Thus, institutional staff contacts were asked to distribute the questionnaires at several of the institutions (Grand Valley Institution for Women, Joliette Institution, and Fraser Valley Institution for Women). Researchers/institutional contacts made an effort to raise awareness regarding the study at the institutions by visiting offender residences or by means of a general assembly.
Community Staff
Memos were sent by email to parole officers identified as potentially supervising women offenders, the five Employment Coordinators, and the Director of the Employment and Employability Program to determine their interest in participating in interviews. Parole officers were also asked to inform women whom they supervised about the study and to query their interest in participating. Thirty-three staff members from parole offices across the country responded indicating that at least one of their female clients was interested (or might be interested) in participating in the study. A total of 106 questionnaires were subsequently mailed to these 33 individuals employed in the parole offices for distribution to women offenders in the community, and telephone interviews were conducted with interested community staff members. Due to the fact that email addresses were not available for all Community Employment Centre staff, initial contact with staff at these centres was attempted by telephone. Centre managers/supervisors were asked it they were interested in receiving copies of the questionnaire for themselves and other staff at their centres which were then sent by mail.
11 The contact at each institution was asked to provide a list of the names of any staff members involved in employment programming or supervision at their institutions. The researchers then sent an email to these individuals asking them if they would be interested in participating in an interview to discuss their perceptions and experiences related to employment programming for women.
Measures
Offender Management System (OMS)
Data obtained from OMS were used to construct a profile of women currently residing in federal institutions and on conditional release in the community. First, a summary of the general characteristics of the population (e.g., demographic information, risk, needs, motivation, and reintegration levels) was provided. Second, a comprehensive review of women offenders educational and employment history, as well as other criminogenic needs, was obtained from the Offender Intake Assessment (OIA) and the Community Intervention Scale (CIS) both of which are risk/need assessment tools utilized by Correctional Service Canada. Finally, data were also obtained from the system to provide an overview of women offenders' employment opportunities and training at the time of the study.
Women Offender Questionnaires: Institution and Community
General Employment Information. A series of questions were developed for the present study to obtain more detailed information regarding women's background, employment history, intentions regarding work, and interests for future careers, employment experience, and training. Many of these questions were developed based on previous measures (e.g., Brown, 2002; Gillis, 2002; Shaw et al., 1991a; 1991b; Shaw et al., 1994) that were modified to reflect the specific objectives and the questionnaire format utilized in the present study. Several additional questions were developed specifically to assess women's experience with or interest in certain employment programs or services. Also included in the survey were questions regarding women's perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of working as well as any perceived difficulties or barriers to employment that women had experienced in the past. Several questions were also included to determine women's community living arrangements and potential child-care needs (e.g., number and age of any dependents, existence of child care if employed in the community). Finally, additional open-ended questions were designed to solicit women's suggestions for future directions in the area of employment programming.
Two versions of this set of general employment questions for women offenders were developed, one set for women in the institutions and one for women on release in the community. There was some overlap between the two because the main topics of interest in each setting were employment experiences (past and/or current). However, the emphasis shifted somewhat depending on the context (i.e., greater focus on employment history, institutional training/employment, and interests for the institutional version; greater focus on current employment and use of employment services in the community for the community version). In addition to these general questions designed to elicit qualitative data, three additional scales were included in the final package of questionnaires presented to women offenders in the institutions and in the community to assess self-efficacy and social support for employment: the Occupational Self-Efficacy Scale, the Social Support for Employment Scale, and the Family Support for Employment Scale 12, which are described in greater detail below. The complete Institutional and Community Versions of the questionnaire presented to women offenders are shown in Appendix F and Appendix G, respectively.
Occupational Self-Efficacy Scale. The occupational self-efficacy scale (Fletcher, Hansson, & Bailey, 1992) was designed to assess the degree to which offenders felt competent in their abilities to perform certain employment-related tasks (e.g., work performance, learning self-efficacy, organizational/social competence). The measure consisted of 29 items that were rated on a 5-point scale to determine the degree to which the individual perceived that she would be better or worse than others with respect to a number of employment-related skills or abilities. This measure has also been utilized with a sample of federal male offenders. Gillis (2002) reported that occupational self-efficacy was associated with several employment related variables (i.e., employment status, quality of employment, number of weeks employed) as well as recidivism rates and survival time in the community. Adequate reliability estimates were demonstrated for each of the three sub-scales for the measure in the present study: Work Performance (alpha = .90), Learning Self-Efficacy (alpha = .85), Organization/ Social Competence (alpha = .84).
12 Note that the latter two scales (assessing support for employment) require respondents to complete the questions based on their experiences with employment and individuals in the community. Thus, whereas offenders in the community were able to report on their current situation, the questions were modified somewhat for the institutional version of the questionnaire to reflect offenders' perceptions of the quality of their support systems prior to incarceration.
Social Support for Employment Scale. This scale was modified by Gillis (2002) based on the Social Support for Crime Scale (Andrews, 1985). Thus, the scale was re-designed with a focus on employment, rather than crime, to reflect the degree to which respondents affiliated with other employed individuals (4 items) as well the extent of their resources or positive role models for employment (7 items). All items were rated on a 4-point scale and alpha for the total scale for a sample of male offenders was .83 (Gillis, 2002). Construct validity and predictive validity were also demonstrated among a sample of male offenders. Specifically, Gillis (2002) reported that the Social Support for Employment Scale was associated with other employment-related variables (e.g., employment status, quality of employment, number of weeks employed). Moreover, the Social Support for Employment Scale was also predictive of later criminal outcomes, including any violations of release conditions (i.e., suspensions, revocations, new offences), the total number of violations, and survival time in the community following release. For the present study, alpha was .87 for the Affective Ties Scale and .83 for the Resource Model Scale.
Family Support for Employment Scale. This scale was part of a measure designed to assess stress and coping among correctional officers (Cullen, Link, Wolfe, & Frank, 1985). The Family Support Scale was designed to assess the degree of support that respondents expected family members to give when respondents experienced work-related stress. 13 The scale consisted of 6 items, each of which were rated on a 7-point scale ranging from "very strongly agree" to "very strongly disagree". Construct validity was demonstrated in that family support for employment was associated with less stress in the workplace. The scale demonstrated adequate internal reliability (alpha = .75 in Cullen, Link, et al., 1985; and alpha = .84 in Cullen, Lemming, Link, & Wozniak, 1985). Similar results were obtained based on the sample for the present study (alpha = .85).
13 Although the original questionnaire was designed to assess the degree of support provided by a “spouse”, the wording of the questionnaire was changed slightly for the present study to determine degree of perceived support provided by “family” in general, allowing a greater number of offenders (those without a spouse) to respond to this questionnaire.
Institutional Staff - General Employment Survey
This survey was developed for the present study (see Appendix H). Institutional staff were asked to rate the relative importance of various correctional programs. In addition, staff members were presented with several short open-ended questions designed to determine perceived positive and negative outcomes associated with employment programs and their suggestions for future directions in the area of employment programming. Staff members were also asked to respond to a number of questions designed to assess their attitudes toward employment programming for women offenders. The questions included in the present study were modified from a series of descriptive questions utilized by Saipe (1971) to determine the attitudes of executives in private industry regarding industries in Canadian prisons. In total, there was one set of 13 items related to the importance of various goals regarding institutional employment (e.g., profit/financial, rehabilitation), and two additional sets of items (10 items, 12 items) relating to the operational structure of institutional employment/programming, the similarity between community and institutional employment, the perceived effectiveness of employment programs, and the degree of skills acquired by inmates. 14 All items were rated on a 5-point scale. Scale items were utilized to provide simple descriptive information regarding attitudes towards employment by Saipe (1971) and no psychometric data were reported. Thus, these items were utilized to provide qualitative information regarding staff attitudes toward various aspects of institutional employment programming in the present study (i.e., average scores and percentage agreement with the individual items).
14 Only items from the questionnaire that had direct applicability to the current population (i.e., institutional staff members) from Saipe's (1971) survey were included in the present study. In addition, a few questions were added to those already present, and a few of the original questions were modified somewhat to reflect current populations and programs (e.g., in some cases, the wording of the items were changed to reflect attitudes towards employment programming and work in general, rather than just prison industry programs).
Community Employment Centre Staff – Employment Questionnaire
Questionnaires for staff at Community Employment Centres (see Appendix I) were designed to assess staff members' perceptions of the employment-related services needed and the degree to which women offenders were utilizing the Community Employment Centres. Staff members were also asked about the existence of other employment-related programming for women in the community, any difficulties with current employment services, suggestions for encouraging women's use of the centres, and for future directions for employment programming for women.
Institution and Community Staff - Phone Interviews
In addition to the questionnaires which were completed by interested staff members, telephone interviews were conducted with staff members from the institutions (see Appendix J), community parole officers (see Appendix K), CORCAN Regional (see Appendix L) and National staff (see Appendix M). These interviews were designed to obtain more in-depth information on staff viewpoints regarding the nature and importance of employment programs for women. Several open-ended questions were also asked regarding perceived difficulties related to employment programming in the institution or community, or any perceived resistance to employment programming by staff members. Finally, staff members' opinions regarding suggestions to improve employment services for women in the future were solicited.
RESULTS
The results section was organized to follow the stated objectives of the current paper. First, a profile of women offenders' risk, need, reintegration potential, and motivation level was presented. Second, an in-depth examination of women offenders' employment needs and history was undertaken based on Offender Intake Assessment data and from additional information obtained from questionnaires completed by offenders (incarcerated and in the community). Third, women offender's experiences and perceptions of current institutional training and employment as well as interests for future institutional employment opportunities were examined. Staff perceptions of the current state of employment programming as well as their attitudes and beliefs regarding employment for women offenders were assessed.
Next, the focus of the paper moved toward the community, including a description of current occupations for employed women offenders, as well as the occupational interests of those who were unemployed at the time of the study. This was followed by an assessment of offenders' self-efficacy for performing employment-related tasks, a description of their relationships, families, and perceptions of social support for employment, and finally, an examination of offender and staff knowledge, awareness, and use (offenders) of community employment services. Perceptions regarding linkages in employment between institution and community or across various institutions or regions were also determined. Finally, general attitudes regarding the value and importance of employment and perceived barriers to employment for women offenders were discussed, and suggestions regarding the future of employment programming for women were summarized and presented.
Risk and Need Profiles
Information regarding risk, need, and reintegration potential based on a snapshot of the women offender population, is shown in Table 3. At intake, the largest proportion of women presented as being high need, and low to medium risk to re-offend. Furthermore, the majority of the population was assessed as having high motivation (54%) and high reintegration potential (54%) at intake. For those women for whom data were available at the time of release to the community, the largest percentage of women presented as having a ‘medium' level of need and ‘low' risk. Similar to the levels reported at intake, available data indicated that, at release, the majority of women had a high motivation level (67%) and high reintegration potential (60%).
Table 3: Percentage of Women Serving Federal Sentences (May 1 st , 2004) with various Need, Risk, Motivation, and Reintegration Potential Profiles at Intake and at Release.
|
Levels At Intake: Women Offender Population |
Levels At Release: Women Offender Community Population |
|---|---|---|
Need |
(n = 773) |
(n = 293) |
Low |
23% |
35% |
Medium |
35% |
45% |
High |
42% |
20% |
Risk |
(n = 773) |
(n = 293) |
Low |
37% |
57% |
Medium |
39% |
32% |
High |
24% |
11% |
Motivation Level |
(n = 661) |
(n = 231) |
Low |
7% |
5% |
Medium |
39% |
28% |
High |
54% |
67% |
Reintegration Potential Profile |
(n = 732) |
(n = 231) |
Low |
22% |
7% |
Medium |
24% |
33% |
High |
54% |
60% |
Note . Data presented in this table were obtained from the Offender Management System. Intake information was collected via the Offender Intake Assessment (Motiuk, 1997), and data obtained at release were obtained from the Community Intervention Scale, both of which are risk/need assessment tools utilized by Correctional Service Canada.
Employment Needs and History
Employment Indicators from the Offender Intake Assessment
Information regarding offender needs at intake was available for the majority of inmates currently incarcerated or under supervision in the community. During the Dynamic Factors Identification and Analysis (DFIA) component of the Offender Intake
Assessment (OIA) process, offenders' criminogenic needs are assessed in seven domains: employment, marital/family, associates/social interaction, community functioning, attitude, personal/emotional, and substance abuse. Two different types of data are obtained for each of these domains. First, multiple indicators are assessed. For example, the employment domain includes 35 employment indicators which are scored as being either present or absent for each offender. These indicators are more generally categorized as assessing six principal components of employment: ability, work record, rewards, co-worker relations, supervisory relations, and interventions.
Furthermore, an overall score is generated for each offender based on these indicators so that each domain is scored as either: ‘asset to community adjustment', ‘no need for improvement', ‘some need for improvement', or ‘considerable need for improvement'. The only exceptions are the personal/emotional and substance abuse domains which are scored only in terms of the last three ratings (i.e., the rating ‘asset to community adjustment' is not utilized).
In order to investigate women's pre-incarceration employment history, women's employment needs were first assessed through an examination of the employment domain of the offender intake process. Overall, results indicated that 15% of women were perceived to have “considerable need for improvement”, and 42% showed “some need for improvement” in the employment domain. A little over one-third of women (36%) were perceived to have “no immediate need for improvement”, and employment was perceived to be an asset for only 7% of these women. In order to conduct further analyses related to the overall employment need level, the findings from the overall employment domain were dichotomized to identify those women who had no need for improvement in the employment domain (combining ‘asset to community adjustment' and ‘no need for improvement' categories) versus those who had at least some need for improvement (combining ‘some need for improvement' and ‘considerable need for improvement' categories).
In addition, the percentage of women with identified needs on each of the 35 employment indicators at intake to federal institutions was assessed (see Table 4). Overall, the majority of women (57%) presented as experiencing at least some need for improvement in the employment domain. Also, a large percentage of women had educational needs (e.g., 66% of women offenders did not have a high-school diploma) In addition, more than half (58%) of women offenders did not have a skill, trade, or profession, and 45% of women offenders expressed some dissatisfaction in this area. An overwhelming 72% of women were unemployed at the time of their arrest, and almost half (47%) were unemployed 90% or more of the time. Finally, fairly high percentages of women reported that their jobs were lacking in rewards (lack of benefits, lack of security, insufficient salary) and a relatively small percentage of women reported any prior employment interventions.
In order to provide additional information regarding the employment needs of different groups, a series of chi-square tests were performed to compare the proportion of incarcerated versus community women, younger versus older women 15, and Aboriginal versus non-Aboriginal women with needs on each of the employment indicators at intake. A complete report of these results is provided in Appendices N, O, and P and significant results are displayed in Figures 1 to 3, respectively. With respect to the Overall Employment Domain rating, more Aboriginal and younger women offenders had employment needs at intake, as compared to non-Aboriginal and older offenders. Other differences were observed with respect to some of the individual employment indicators, primarily those related to educational levels and employment history. Overall, results appeared to indicate that women incarcerated at the time of the study, younger women, and Aboriginal women quite consistently displayed greater educational needs and a less extensive job history than women residing in the community at the time of the study, older women, and non-Aboriginal women, respectively.
15 Women's mean age, based on the profile of women on May 1 st , 2004 was 37.6. Thus, age groups were formed using a mean-split, so that the younger group included women 37 years of age or younger, and the older group included women 38 years of age and older. This criteria was used throughout the remainder of the study for any analysis determining age differences (for snapshot data or for the sample of women offender questionnaire respondents).
Table 4: Number and Percentage of Women Offenders with Identified Employment Needs at Intake to Federal Institutions.
Employment Domain |
N |
(%) |
|---|---|---|
Some or Considerable Need for Intervention in Employment Domain (n = 773) |
442 |
(57%) |
Ability |
|
|
Less than grade 8 |
121 |
(17%) |
Less than grade 10 |
293 |
(41%) |
No high school diploma |
471 |
(66%) |
Finds learning difficult |
136 |
(19%) |
Learning disabilities |
73 |
(10%) |
Physical problems which interfere with learning |
32 |
(4%) |
Memory problems |
128 |
(18%) |
Concentration problems |
171 |
(24%) |
Problems with reading |
103 |
(14%) |
Problems with writing |
106 |
(15%) |
Problems with numeracy |
181 |
(25%) |
Difficulty comprehending instructions |
54 |
(8%) |
Lacks a skill area/trade/profession |
417 |
(58%) |
Dissatisfied with skill area/trade/profession |
322 |
(45%) |
Physical problems interfere with work |
135 |
(19%) |
Work Record |
|
|
No employment history |
129 |
(18%) |
Unemployed at the time of arrest |
520 |
(72%) |
Unemployed 90% or more |
336 |
(47%) |
Unemployed 50% or more |
472 |
(66%) |
Unstable job history |
459 |
(63%) |
Often shows up late for work |
33 |
(5%) |
Poor attendance record |
47 |
(7%) |
Difficulty meeting workload requirements |
22 |
(3%) |
Lacks initiative |
76 |
(11%) |
Quit a job without another |
265 |
(37%) |
Been laid off from work |
186 |
(26%) |
Been fired from a job |
136 |
(19%) |
Rewards |
|
|
Salary has been insufficient |
261 |
(36%) |
Lack employment benefits |
324 |
(45%) |
Job lacks security |
279 |
(39%) |
Co-worker Relations |
|
|
Difficulty with co-workers |
21 |
(3%) |
Supervisory Relations |
|
|
Difficulties with superiors |
41 |
(6%) |
Interventions |
|
|
Prior vocational assessments |
90 |
(13%) |
Participated in employment programs |
197 |
(27%) |
Completed an occupational development program |
79 |
(11%) |
Note . Data presented in this table were obtained from the Offender Management System. Information regarding employment needs was collected via the Dynamic Factors Identification Analysis of the Offender Intake Assessment (Motiuk, 1997) utilized by Correctional Service Canada. The effective sample size for the individual employment indicators ranged from n = 708 to n = 723 depending on the amount of missing data for each indicator .
Figure 1: Percentage of Women Offenders in the Institutions and Community with Employment Needs at Intake
Figure 2: Percentage of Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Women Offenders with Employment Needs at Intake
Figure 3: Percentage of Younger and Older Women Offenders with Employment Needs at Intake
Note: Numbers represent the percentage of offenders in each group with perceived needs on each index. All items shown on the graphs represent a difference between groups that is significant at p < .001 .
Criminogenic Contributing Factors and Comorbidity of Needs. In addition to employment needs already discussed, the majority of women offenders demonstrated moderate to high need in most other need domains assessed at intake to federal institutions (see Table 5). Particularly notable was the fact that almost half of the women had considerable need in the Personal/Emotional and Substance Abuse domains.
Women offender questionnaire respondents were also asked to describe their own perceptions of their criminogenic needs (i.e., factors that contributed to their involvement in criminal behaviour) and also what factors, if addressed, would help to keep them out of trouble with the law in the future (see Table 6). Somewhat similar to the results reported based on Offender Intake Assessment data, the factor noted most commonly by women as a contributing factor to their criminal behaviour was substance abuse, followed by difficulties in the personal/emotional domain. Interestingly, although few women identified factors related to the employment domain as contributing to their involvement in criminal behaviour , assistance in the employment domain (having a job, job-related training, and educational upgrading) was most commonly listed by women as a factor that would help them to desist from criminal activities in the future. Other factors commonly mentioned as helping them to stay out of trouble included assistance with personal/emotional issues (e.g., self-esteem, counselling), positive associations (e.g., good relationships/support, avoidance of negative associates), positive marital/family relationships, and the avoidance of substances.
Comorbidity of Needs. Results based on data obtained from the Offender Intake Assessment also revealed significant moderate associations between various need domains (see Table 7). In particular, Employment Needs appeared to be most strongly associated with needs in the Associates, Substance Abuse, and Community Functioning domains. Furthermore, Employment Needs were also moderately related to Overall Assessed Need (r = .33, p < .001), Overall Assessed Risk (r = .24, p < .001), and negatively associated with Assessed Reintegration Potential at intake (r = -.26, p < .001).
Table 5: Criminogenic Needs at Intake for Women Offenders Incarcerated or on Release in the Community on May 1 st , 2004 (N = 773).
Need Domain |
Asset |
No Immediate Need |
Some Need |
Considerable Need |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Employment |
7% |
36% |
42% |
15% |
Marital/Family |
8% |
37% |
35% |
20% |
Associates |
6% |
37% |
41% |
16% |
Community Functioning |
6% |
60% |
30% |
4% |
Attitude |
15% |
54% |
20% |
11% |
Personal/EG59 motional |
N/A |
19% |
36% |
45% |
Substance Abuse |
N/A |
40% |
15% |
45% |
Note . Data presented in this table were obtained from the Offender Management System. Intake information was collected via the Offender Intake Assessment (Motiuk, 1997), which is a risk/need assessment tool utilized by the Correctional Service of Canada .
Table 6: Percentage of Women Offenders Reporting the Following Factors Contributing to Criminal Behaviour and Factors to Address to Help Desist from Criminal Actions (n = 89).
Need Domain |
Contributing Factors (n = 87) |
Intervention Would Help Desist from Criminal Activities (n = 91) |
|---|---|---|
Employment |
10 (11%) |
38 (42%) |
Marital/Family |
22 (25%) |
25 (27%) |
Associates |
19 (22%) |
26 (29%) |
Community Functioning |
13 (15%) |
10 (11%) |
Attitude |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Personal/Emotional |
26 (30%) |
28 (31%) |
Substance Abuse |
44 (51%) |
22 (24%) |
Table 7: Inter-correlations between Need Domains at Intake for Women Offenders Incarcerated or on Release in the Community on May 1 st , 2004 (N = 773).
|
2. M/F |
3.Assoc |
4. Sub |
5. Com |
6. Per |
7. Att |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Employment |
.27*** |
.42*** |
.37*** |
.39*** |
.18*** |
.09** |
2. Marital/Family |
--- |
.20*** |
.25*** |
.23*** |
.40*** |
.06 |
3. Associates |
|
--- |
.36*** |
.25*** |
.14*** |
.18*** |
4. Substance Abuse |
|
|
--- |
.10** |
.31*** |
.13*** |
5. Community Functioning |
|
|
|
--- |
.11** |
.05 |
6. Personal/Emotional |
|
|
|
|
--- |
.22*** |
7. Attitude |
|
|
|
|
|
--- |
Note : Data presented in this table were obtained from the Offender Management System. Correlations were calculated using the 4-point scale (or 3-point scale for Personal/Emotional and Substance Abuse Domains) as shown in the previous table (e.g., “asset to community” to “considerable need for improvement”). **p < .01 *** p < .001
Some supplementary information was available regarding the link between substance abuse and employment. These data were based on two items included in the Substance Abuse Domain of the OIA: “Drinking interferes with employment” and “Drug use interferes with employment”. Results indicated that drug abuse interfered with employment for 32% of women offenders at intake. A greater percentage of Aboriginal women offenders (33%) than non-Aboriginal women offenders (9%) indicated that drinking interfered with employment, c 2 (1, N = 700) = 55.04, p < .001. In addition, a greater percentage of younger women offenders (37%) than older women offenders (24%) indicated that drug abuse interfered with employment, c 2 (1, N = 716) = 13.25, p < .001. No differences were observed for these two items at intake for incarcerated and community populations. 16
16 Due to the number of analyses to be performed, results were considered to be significant at p < .01.
Comparison of Employment Needs at Intake and Release. Additional analyses were performed to assess employment needs at intake versus release for those women who had their needs assessed at both times ( n = 249). Among women on release in the community who had their employment needs assessed both at intake to the institution and upon release to the community, 54% had identified employment needs at intake and 50% had identified employment needs at release (some or considerable). Results also indicated a high correlation between employment at intake and release 17, r (249) = .78, p < .001.
Pre-Incarceration Employment History : Questionnaire Respondents
In addition to the overview of women's employment needs that was obtained via the Offender Intake Assessment, more detailed information regarding pre-incarceration sources of income, education levels, work experience, and salary levels was solicited from women offender questionnaire respondents. Note that the information presented in the section, unless otherwise stated, was based on responses from both incarcerated and community questionnaire respondents.
Education Level. The majority of women (50/86; 58%) reported that they had achieved less than a grade 12 education level while attending school in the community. However, the majority (58/91; 64%) also reported that they had engaged in some upgrading since that time. Note that the results from the questionnaire sample appear to be fairly similar to the profile of women offenders obtained based on the Offender Intake Assessment presented earlier (i.e., 65% of women did not have a high school diploma at intake to federal institutions).
Sources of Income. According to women offender questionnaire respondents 18, main sources of income prior to incarceration included: employment (24/71; 34%), welfare/social assistance (19/71; 27%), illegal activities (17/71; 24%), or other sources such as family, friends, or mother's allowance (11/71; 15%). Notably, none of the questionnaire respondents indicated a reliance on unemployment insurance or disability as a main source of income. In addition to main sources of income, a number of respondents also reported reliance on additional sources of legal or illegal sources of income including: the drug trade (29/92; 32%), prostitution (18/92; 20%), working “under-the-table” (13/92; 14%), or exotic dancing (7/92; 8%).
17 Correlations were calculated based on the 4-point ratings ranging from “asset to community” to “considerable need for improvement”.
18 Note that a number of respondents ( n = 21) did not respond to this question correctly (circling more than one response), indicating either an equal reliance on more than one source of income, or difficulty understanding the question. Thus, only the responses of those who answered this question correctly ( n = 71) were included in this summary.
Work Experience. Results presented above indicated that only about one-third of women offenders reported employment as a main source of income prior to incarceration . In addition to their experiences just prior to incarceration, questionnaire respondents were also asked whether they had ever had any work experience in the community prior to incarceration; the majority (73/92; 79%) indicated that they had at least some work experience outside of the home prior to incarceration. Note that this is similar to the population profile results reported earlier based on Offender Intake Assessment data (Table 3, shown previously) which indicated that 18% of the women under federal supervision had no employment history at intake to federal institutions. Also note that more older offenders (93%) than young women offenders (71%) reported that they had worked outside the home prior to incarceration, c 2 (1, N = 91) = 6.88, p < .01 19.
Some descriptive information regarding specific types of employment in the community prior to incarceration was also obtained. In order to provide structure to offenders' responses, the National Occupational Classification (NOC) structure (Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, 2001) was used as a guide 20 to code occupational information (e.g., history and interests) in a meaningful manner. The NOC classifies occupations according to the nine overall occupational groups: 1) Sales & Service; 2) Business, Finance, & Administrative; 3) Health; 4) Social Science, Education, Government Service, & Religion; 5) Processing, Manufacturing, & Utilities; 6) Trades, Transport, & Equipment Operators; 7) Art, Culture, Recreation, & Sport; 8) Natural & Applied Sciences; and 9) Primary Industry.
19No differences were observed between institution and community samples or Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal offenders with respect to prior work experience outside the home. Due to the number of analyses to be performed, the significance level was set at p < .01.
20 Note that the National Occupational Classifications can be used as a guide to perform complex occupational analysis within various organizations. That was NOT the purpose or goal of the present study. In the present study, offenders only provided job titles or brief descriptions of their occupational interests. Occupational histories and interests were coded as best as possible (given the degree of information possible) into one of the nine overall occupational groups provided. Thus, the NOC simply provided only an overall structure by which to provide a clear and concise description of the occupational information provided.
Overall, women (incarcerated and community) were most likely to report that they had prior employment (i.e., most recent jobs prior to incarceration) in Sales and Service occupations followed by Business, Financial, and Administrative positions (see Table 8). Some examples of commonly reported jobs within the Sales and Services Occupations included jobs in the restaurant or food industry, and positions in areas such as retail, sales, telemarketing, or cashiers. Some of those most commonly listed among the Business, Finance, and Administrative occupations included administrative, receptionist, or secretarial employment. Note that more detailed information regarding incarcerated and community women offenders' jobs prior to incarceration is provided in Appendix Q. The percentages of women with jobs in the remaining job categories prior to incarceration were all under 10% (see Table 6). When asked to describe any additional experience in other types of employment, women also listed employment in the sales and service area as their most common type of alternative employment experience in the community prior to incarceration (40% of incarcerated sample; 44% of community sample).
Rates of Pay. The majority of women (51/69; 74%) indicated that their salary for their most recent job prior to incarceration was sufficient to meet their basic needs, with a reported average hourly salary of $11.21 (SD = 5.72; n = 53). This was fairly similar to the salary that women offenders perceived that they would need to make in order to meet their basic needs: $11.63 (SD = 3.88; n = 76). However, note that non-Aboriginal women (M = 11.55, SD = 4.67) reported a higher average salary prior to incarceration than Aboriginal women (M = 7.92, SD = 2.23), t (1, 40) = 3.70, p < .001.
Table 8: Number (Percentage) of Women Reporting Most Recent Job Prior to Incarceration in each of the Major Occupational Groups .
Occupational Group |
Number (Percentage) of Women with Prior Jobs in these Areas |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Incarcerated Women (n = 58) |
Community Women (n = 34) |
|
|
|
Sales and Service Occupations |
23 (40%) |
12 (35%) |
Business, Finance and Administration Occupations |
10 (17%) |
6 (18%) |
Health Occupations |
2 (3%) |
3 (9%) |
Social Science, Education, Government Service, Religion |
4 (7%) |
1 (3%) |
Processing, Manufacturing and Utilities |
3 (5%) |
2 (6%) |
Trades, Transport and Equipment Operators and Related |
2 (3%) |
2 (6%) |
Occupations in Art, Culture, Recreation and Sport |
3 (5%) |
1 (3%) |
Natural and Applied Sciences and Related Occupations |
1 (2%) |
1 (3%) |
Occupations Unique to Primary Industry |
0 (0%) |
1 (3%) |
Other |
4 (7%) |
2 (6%) |
Note . Some women listed more than one job prior to incarceration, in different overall job classification groups.
Women were also asked whether they were qualified for any jobs that would allow them to make a salary sufficient to meet their basic needs. The majority of respondents (64/83; 77%) indicated that they were. However, more older (93%) than younger women offenders (67%) reported that they were qualified for jobs with a salary sufficient to meet their needs, c 2 (1, N = 82) = 7.24, p < .01 21. When asked to describe the types of jobs that they were qualified for (allowing them to make a sufficient wage), the pattern of results was somewhat similar to those reported earlier with respect to their most recent jobs prior to incarceration. Specifically, women reported mostly qualifications for jobs resulting in a sufficient salary in the sales and service areas and in business, finance, and administration (see Table 9).
21Other than those mentioned above, no other differences between institutional vs. community samples or Aboriginal vs. non-Aboriginal offenders, or younger vs. older offenders were observed in this section regarding rates of pay. Due to the number of analyses to be performed, the significance level for all analyses in this section was set at p < .01.
Table 9: Number (Percentage) of Women Reporting Qualifications for Jobs with Sufficient Salaries (to meet basic needs) in each of the Major Occupational Groups .
Occupational Group |
Number (Percentage) of Women with Qualifications for Jobs Providing Sufficient Salaries in these Areas (n = 92) |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Incarcerated (n = 58) |
Community (n = 34) |
Sales and Service Occupations |
14 (24%) |
12 (35%) |
Business, Finance and Administration Occupations |
13 (22%) |
12 (35%) |
Trades, Transport and Equipment Operators and Related |
7 (12%) |
4 (12%) |
Social Science, Education, Government Service, Religion |
3 (5%) |
5 (15%) |
Occupations in Art, Culture, Recreation and Sport |
4 (7%) |
4 (12%) |
Processing, Manufacturing and Utilities |
2 (3%) |
3 (9%) |
Health Occupations |
3 (5%) |
2 (6%) |
Natural and Applied Sciences and Related Occupations |
1 (2%) |
1 (3%) |
Occupations Unique to Primary Industry |
1 (2%) |
0 (0%) |
Other |
9 (16%) |
5 (15%) |
Note . Some women listed more than one job for which they possessed qualifications for jobs that would allow them to obtain a salary sufficient to meet their basic needs, in different overall job classification groups
Employment Training and Other Employment Skills. Only about one-third of incarcerated women offenders (18/54; 33%) reported taking employment training courses in the community prior to incarceration. Types of training listed were very diverse, including (but not limited to): Workplace Hazardous Material Information System (WHMIS) training (3/54), computer training (2/54), “payroll” training (2/54), and nursing courses (2/54).
In addition to formal training, slightly more than half of incarcerated women offenders (34/53; 64%) reported that they possessed other skills that would help them to find a job. Many offenders described previous job experience, certifications, or job specific skills that they possessed (19/53). Also of interest were women's perceptions of the “personal” skills they possessed that might be useful in the work force. Specifically, a number of women indicated that they possessed “relationship” skills (10/53) such as being “sociable”, “team player”, a “people person”. Others reported that they were intelligent or had the ability to learn (9/53; e.g., “quick learner”, “smart”) or that they were highly motivated or dedicated (6/53; e.g., “hard worker”, “eager”). Finally, a few women suggested that their communication skills (3/53) or that fact that they were bilingual (3/53) would likely assist them in the world of work.
Summary
Results indicated that the majority of women offenders demonstrated employment needs at intake to federal institutions, particularly with respect to a high unemployment rate, the lack of skills, trade, or profession, and relatively low educational attainment. Employment needs were particularly noticeable among Aboriginal and younger women offenders, and were associated with needs in other domains, particularly criminal associates, substance abuse, and community functioning. Interestingly, women themselves did not report difficulties relating to employment to be a strong contributing factor to past criminal behavior, but assistance with and positive outcomes related to employment were considered to be fairly important by women with respect to “keeping them out of trouble with the law” in the future. Also, overall, there appeared to be little change in employment needs from intake to release among women offenders.
Despite the fact that only about one-third of women offender questionnaire respondents reported employment to be a main source of income prior to incarceration, the majority (approximately 80%) reported at least some prior employment experience in the community, and the average reported salary was modest to adequate, although the average salary reported by Aboriginal women prior to incarceration was quite significantly lower than that of non-Aboriginal women. Also, fewer younger then older women offenders reported that they were qualified for jobs that would allow them to make a salary sufficient to meet their basic needs. Finally, results indicated that the occupational areas in which most women reported prior employment experience and qualifications for jobs with a salary sufficient to meet their basic needs were: sales and service; and business, finance, and administration.Offender Institutional Employment and Interests
Having completed a review of women offenders' pre-incarceration employment and income related history, the focus of the study turned to an examination of institutional employment opportunities and interests. First, a profile of current employment and training for all incarcerated women based on data obtained from the Offender Management System was determined. Second, self-reports of institutional employment and training as well as future interests for employment and training were obtained from the questionnaire sample. Some additional information regarding participants' perceptions of their work opportunities (degree of satisfaction, reasons for taking the job) were also assessed.
Offender Management System: Institutional Education, Vocational Training, and Employment
Education and Vocational Training. First, data regarding any educational or vocational training programs that had been completed by incarcerated federal offenders by the date of the snapshot were obtained from the OMS system. Results indicated that 137 of the 384 women residing in CSC institutions (36%) had completed some sort of educational or vocational training, either full-time (15%) or part-time (85%) by the snapshot date of May 1 st , 2004. These 137 women had completed a total of 285 educational or training programs 22. Of all training programs ( n = 285), the most common program placements completed involved vocational training placements (155/285; 54%), secondary education courses such as Adult Basic Education Levels I to IV (63/285; 22%) or Graduate Equivalency Diploma (20/285; 7%), or employability skills/computer skills training courses (25/285; 9%). A further breakdown of the vocational training completed by women offenders by the day of the snapshot is shown in Figure 4. The three most common types of vocational training courses completed by women offenders included: WHMIS, Food Handling and Safety, and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR).
22 Note that the total number of CSC and CORCAN educational or training placements is greater than the number of women who participated in these programs as OMS data records indicated that some of the women had completed more than one institutional educational or vocational training program.
Figure 4: Percentage of Vocational Training Placements Completed (n = 155) in each Area by Women Offenders.
Note: Percentages reflect the number of placements completed in each category (full- or part-time) out of the total number of placements ( n = 155). Included in the “Other” category were vocational training placements that represented less than 4% of all vocational placements for each of the following categories: horticulture, traffic control, AUTO-CAD Level I – II, workplace signing, employment preparation courses, and beauty parlour training .
Figure 5: Percentage of Institutional Work Placements (n = 249) in each Area for Women Offenders .
Institutional Employment. Data regarding offender employment were obtained from the OMS system for all offenders employed in the institution on the date of the snapshot (May 1 st , 2004). According to results obtained from the automated database, results indicated that 211 of the 384 women residing in CSC institutions (55%) were employed, either full-time or part-time, on that day. These 211 women were involved in a total of 249 work placements 23. The majority of these placements were classified as CSC employment (229/249; 92%), a small percentage were CORCAN placements (20/249; 8%), and no women were recorded in OMS as participating in work releases on that date. The majority of placements were recorded in the database as “full-time” (75%), and the remaining placements were considered to be “part-time” (23%) or “other” (2%).
Figure 5 shows a break-down of the most common institutional work assignments. Overall, the majority of placements were in the area of cleaning, followed by grounds keeping, food services, and administrative services of some sort (e.g., administrative clerk, library administration). At the time of the data snapshot, CORCAN placements were comprised of employment in textile services and graphic design. Other placements that occurred with some frequency included positions in “stores” and “inmate social-cultural activities”.
Questionnaire Respondents: Institutional Training, Employment, and Interests 24
Training. With respect to training, just over half of incarcerated respondents (30/58; 52%) reported that they had taken some sort of vocational or training program during their incarceration. When asked to describe these programs, many women (16/58) reported taking general education courses (e.g., math, English). Other types of training mentioned most often by the women included: WHMIS (7/58), Basics in Food Safety (4/58), Employability/Marketable Skills (3/58), First-Aid/CPR (3/58), Industrial Cleaning/Custodial (3/58), Computer Skills/Technological (3/58), and Accounting (3/58). Overall, types of training reported by the questionnaire sample would appear to be fairly reflective of that obtained by the population in general (reported earlier based on OMS data)
23Note that the total number of CSC and CORCAN employment placements is greater than the number of women working in the institutions as OMS data records indicated that some of the women had more than one institutional work placement.
24 The community sample was also asked to report any past employment training or work in the institution while they were incarcerated. However, due to the small number of respondents in the community (n = 34) and the fact that their reports were retrospective and might therefore be somewhat less reliable, only the reports of offenders in the institutional sample (recent training and current employment) are reported here. This also allowed for a more direct comparison of current employment and current interests as only incarcerated women were asked about their interests regarding future institutional employment programming.
Women were also asked to describe their interests with respect to institutional employment training. The top three reported training interests were First Aid/CPR (39/58), Computer/Technological Training (36/58), and Vocational Assessments (32/58). Also of note was the fact that a large percentage of women reported interests in several types of training programs providing general skills that might be useful for a variety of employment opportunities (e.g., Employability Skills, Safe Start, WHMIS). With the possible exception of WHMIS training (where the percentage of those interested in receiving the training was more closely matched with those who actually received the training ), the level of training relative to the degree of interest was somewhat low (see Figure 6). A complete list of reported employment training received during incarceration as well as self-reported interests for training is presented in Appendix R.
Employment. Incarcerated women offenders were also asked about their current institutional employment. Overall, 46/58 incarcerated women (79%) reported that they were currently employed within the institution. Note that this number is somewhat higher than the total number of women who were identified as being employed from the women offender population on the day of the snapshot (56%). Therefore, it is possible that those who responded to the survey may have been slightly more interested in working than the population in general. Some of the most common jobs reported by questionnaire participants included: general maintenance (12/58), cleaning (9/58), cooking/food preparation (9/58), teacher/tutor (5/58), and inventory/stores/ shipping/receiving (4/58).Figure 6: Top 15 Training Interests Reported with the Greatest Frequency and Actual Training Completed by Incarcerated Women Offenders (n = 58)
Note: Bars on the graph represent the percentage of the total institutional sample reporting any interest in institutional training in the area. The line shown on the graph indicates the percentage of the total institutional sample reporting receiving training in these areas during their incarceration. Note that actual training was determined by asking women offenders to list any employment training that they had completed during their incarceration. Although vocational assessments were considered to represent “employment training” in the current study, the women may not have considered it as such, and therefore may not have listed any vocational assessments (that they might have completed) for this question. Thus, it is possible that the number of vocational assessments received by women who responded to the questionnaires may have been underestimated in the present study.
With respect to their interests for institutional employment, the top three areas included: Administration (32/58), Care Giver (31/58), and Construction Worker (29/58). However, it should be noted that the percentage of women interested in many other areas of institutional employment were almost equally high (see Figure 4). Relatively speaking, the percentage of actual employment in the area of cooking or food preparation was more closely matched with the level of interest in this area than among other possible occupations shown in Figure 7. Also note that although cleaning was one of the most common institutional work placements for women, only 22% of questionnaire respondents reported an interest in this area of institutional employment (see Appendix S for a complete list of reported institutional employment placements and interests).
Results just described provided some information regarding the extent of interest in various institutional positions versus the actual institutional employment among all institutional questionnaire respondents ( n = 58). Some additional questions were asked of those who were currently employed in the institution ( n = 46) with regards to their current jobs . Among those who were employed at the time of the study, common reasons listed for taking their institutional jobs included: to make money (28/46), enjoy/interest in the type of work (26/46), keep busy/ nothing else to do (14/46), to learn, gain experience , or increase chances of getting a job in the community (6/46), employment training was recommended in their correctional plans (5/46), or because staff suggested they take the job (5/46).
In addition, 64% of women (27/42 incarcerated employed women who responded to this question) reported that they would be interested in performing similar types of work in the community upon release. Overall, even though not all women were able to obtain employment in all of the areas that they might be interested in (see Figure 7), among those who were currently employed , slightly more than half reported at least some degree of interest in their current work and that they would be interested in performing this type of work upon release to the community.
Figure 7: Top 15 Institutional Employment Reported with the Greatest Frequency and Actual Employment Reported by Incarcerated Women Offenders (n = 58 )
Note: Bars on the graph represent the percentage of the total institutional sample reporting any interest in institutional work in the area. The line shown on the graph indicates the percentage of the total institutional sample reporting current institutional employment in the area. Note that the number of women offenders actually employed in groundskeeping may have been underestimated. There were 12 women who reported that their jobs were “maintenance”. Information obtained from CORCAN's Employment and Employability website indicates that there are three different Maintenance categories: Groundskeeper, General Labourer, and Plumber's Assistant. However, based on the limited information provided by respondents, we were unable to determine which one of these positions women were employed in. It should also be noted that many respondents reported interest in more than one institutional employment area. For example, some women reporting interest in even 10 or 15 different types of employment. Since most women could only actually be employed in one (or perhaps two) employment positions within the institution at a time, they obviously couldn't be employed in ALL areas in which they expressed an interest at the time of the study. Thus, the information represented in this graph should be interpreted cautiously. Overall, results are meant to present a rough idea of the areas that women were most interested in RELATIVE to the types of employment that they were likely to obtain .
Those who were employed within the institution were also asked to describe the degree of satisfaction with their current jobs. Just over half of the employed women who responded to the question (26/45) reported that they were either “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their current job(s), 5/45 reported that they were “neither unsatisfied nor satisfied”, and 14/45 reported that they were at least “somewhat unsatisfied” with their current institutional employment positions. Also, among the small number of unemployed incarcerated women ( n = 12) who responded to this question, the most common reason for being unemployed was that they were newly arrived and had not yet been able to secure employment (4/9).
Work Releases. Finally, a small number of incarcerated survey respondents (5/56) reported that they had participated in a work release during their current sentence. Only three of these women reported on the type of employment they performed: two worked for an electronics company and one worked in a “nursing home” for the elderly. Length of time on work release ranged from 2 to 13 months. Some of the advantages noted by women who had participated in work releases included: making money, gaining skills/experience/responsibility, gaining liberty/being in the community, and working with elderly individuals. Few disadvantages or areas for change were noted; however two respondents did suggest that they thought that work releases should last longer than 60 days.
In addition, 54/55 offenders currently incarcerated in federal facilities who responded to this question (98%) reported that they would be interested in participating in a work release. Potential interests for employment on work-release paralleled, to some degree, their interests for institutional employment. Some commonly reported interests included work in the trades (15/54), such as construction, welding, or mechanics, and interests in the area of business or administration (13/54), including “office work”, working in a library, or customer service. However, a fair number of women's responses appeared to reflect interest in care-giving or helping people on work release, although their descriptions were fairly broad, with several women simply noting that they wished to “work with” animals, seniors, or children. For example, 7/54 reported an interest in working with animals in some fashion, 6/54 wanted to work with the elderly, and 5/54 reported an interest in working with children or troubled youth:
“Anything which could help people. Perhaps volunteering in a hospital, volunteering with troubled children or adolescents.”
Summary
Overall, profile data from the Offender Management System indicated that the majority of incarcerated women (approximately 55%) were employed within the institution, with the most common occupations being in cleaning, groundskeeping, and food services. Among questionnaire respondents, however, 79% reported being employed and the reported work placements were somewhat similar (e.g., general “maintenance”, cleaning, and cooking/food preparation). In addition, at least half of the incarcerated women who were working did express at least some degree of interest in and satisfaction with their current institutional placements. However, women offenders' interests did appear to span a broader variety of institutional employment opportunities and training than those in which they were currently or previously engaged. Specifically, although employment placements and training were more closely matched in some areas (e.g., cooking/food preparation, WHMIS training), women offenders reported little employment or training in other areas in which a relatively moderate to high percentage of women expressed an interest (e.g., administration, caregiver, construction). Furthermore, although almost all women offenders reported interest in participating in work release, very few had actually experienced this opportunity. Among those who had, most reported that they believed work releases should last for a longer period of time.
Staff Beliefs and Attitudes Regarding Institutional Employment Programming
The results presented in the previous section provided an overview of institutional work placements for women offenders and their perspectives on employment programming. Given staff members' experiences working with offenders, and the significance of their roles in providing, supervising, or supporting employment programming, staff members' views and attitudes related to institutional employment programming for women were also highly important. Therefore, staff members were asked to describe their perceptions of the current state of employment programming with respect to the following general topic areas: procedures regarding employment programming assignment and perceived employment interests, availability of employment opportunities and programming, difficulties or challenges associated with the delivery of employment programming, resistance to employment programming by institutional staff, support for work releases and community involvement, as well as the importance of various rehabilitative and financial goals related to institutional employment programming. The information presented in this section was based on data collected from institutional staff members and CORCAN Regional/National staff.
Employment Programming Assignment and Perceived Interests
Some factors noted by institutional staff interviewees as playing a role in determining institutional employment assignment included consideration of women's needs (4/17) in the employment domain (e.g., as determined based on the intake assessment), as well as determining whether the abilities and skills (5/17) of the offenders met the requirements for the job (e.g., vocational aptitude, ability to work in groups). Virtually all interviewees (16/17) noted at least some degree of choice in employment assignment, noting that women had the ability to “apply” for employment programs or opportunities that they wanted or that women were assigned to programs based on their “interests”.
Of note, a few staff members (3/17) also specifically mentioned the COPS (Career Occupational Placement Survey) and CAPS (Career Ability Placement Survey) tools that were being used in most institutions to assess offender's employment interests and abilities at the time of the study. These individuals noted the current or potential future utility of these assessment tools for directing offender employment programs and assignment within the institutions.
Overall, findings reported by institutional staff members corroborated the reports of incarcerated women noted earlier suggesting that some of the reasons for their current jobs include an interest in the position or a desire to obtain employment due to the fact that employment was identified as a “need” in the correctional plan. However, just as not all offenders reported an interest in the positions in which they were currently employed, many staff also suggested that women's interests and/or needs had to be balanced with the more objective realities of institutional life. Some of these realities included: the availability of jobs within the institution (13/17) or what staff might deem to be appropriate based on the length of the offenders' sentences and their likely time-period of incarceration (2/17). Finally, many interviewees also spoke to the fact that final decisions regarding work placement were ultimately determined or approved by the Institutional Program Board (7/17).
What we do is we have a program board every Thursday. We deal with the newcomers first of all and we put them in whatever employment is available just to get them started so that they have some kind of wage coming in. After that, women can apply for whatever positions interest them and if they meet the qualifications we discuss their qualifications at program board again and they are approved or not approved, and if they are not approved they are given suggestions on what they need to improve on to get that type of position.
Institutional staff ( n = 18) and CORCAN Regional staff members ( n = 4) were also asked to describe any institutional employment opportunities or training that they perceived to be under high demand by the women. Some of the types of employment opportunities most commonly listed included: CORCAN employment, primarily in the areas of sewing and construction (9/22), “trades” or construction 25 (5/22), grounds maintenance (4/22), animal training/care (4/22); hairdressing (4/22); and janitorial or cleaning positions (4/22).
25Although sewing and construction were also discussed with reference to the CORCAN employment category presented earlier, these CORCAN employment opportunities related to construction were reported separately and NOT included in the totals for this category (trades/construction). The reasoning behind this decision was that most of the interviewees who mentioned CORCAN enterprises seemed to perceive the fact that it was a CORCAN project to be the driving force behind interest in the project, as opposed to the specific “type” of program offered (e.g., construction, sewing). As stated, the most common reason for interest in these CORCAN employment projects appeared to be the incentive pay, regardless of the type of job provided.
The most common reasons for interest in CORCAN employment opportunities reported by staff members was the associated incentive pay, as well as the fact that women could obtain applied skills or certifications or links to employment in the community. Grounds maintenance were listed as in demand by offenders primarily due to the “physical” aspects and location of the job (e.g., work outside, freedom) as well as the ability to be more independent or take initiative. Construction and trades-related occupations were listed as being interesting to women primarily since these positions required little training, but provided the opportunity to make a good salary. Animal training/care, and hairdressing were perceived to be of interest to women due to the fact that training in these areas might result in marketable skills or certifications. Staff also noted that animal training/care programs were very rewarding from a more emotional perspective (e.g., providing unconditional acceptance, learning to care for something, etc.). Finally, the most common reasons reported by staff for offender interest in janitorial or cleaning positions appeared to be the sheer number of these jobs available and the lack of other positions.
Overall, some of the most common reasons for interests in various institutional employment opportunities, as reported by staff, appeared to be the ability to obtain training or certification to assist offenders to obtain jobs in the community or the higher pay levels associated with some types of employment. Also, offender employment interests as perceived by staff appeared to correspond, at least to some degree, with incarcerated women's self-reported institutional employment interests. Thus, it would appear that staff members possess at least a moderate knowledge of offender employment interests (and the reasons for this interest) and might prove to be a supplementary source of information when planning for the delivery and implementation of employment interventions.
Development and Standardization of Employment Programming
CORCAN Regional/National staff members were asked about the degree of standardization of services across institutions or regions and the degree of flexibility to implement new programs. In general, most CORCAN staff tended to speak to the degree of standardization of training programs across institutions. In this respect, several staff noted that the “standard” was to offer third party certified courses, although it appeared that the specific types of certified courses might differ from one institution or region to another. The only certified training programs that were reported by more than one CORCAN staff member to be offered across all of the women's institutions were WHMIS, Basics in Food Safety, and the Employability Skills Program that was soon be implemented to develop generic employability skills. Thus, it comes as no surprise that the majority of CORCAN staff reported at least some degree of flexibility with respect to institutional or regional programs. However, one respondent did report a current perceived shift towards less flexibility and greater structure in employment programming.
I think that it's becoming less flexible, simply because now we're finally listening to the Auditor General, after 3 years of him…or of the office…saying you're not doing it right. So, I think that we're going to see less flexibility, which is fine, which is not a bad thing in this case. I think that it has to be more structured and, again, with the shorter third party certified, industry- recognized, based on market information. Not just willy-nilly, busy-type programs. As of last year, when we had to develop a vocational strategy, each region was responsible for doing an audit of their current vocational offerings. Now, that's vocational - that's not employment per say, because there are a lot of employment opportunities that are not vocational. And as far as vocational programs go, there are specific criteria that each has to meet now in order to be funded.
CORCAN National/Regional staff members were also asked about the development of employment programs or training for women. CORCAN staff suggested that programs for women were primarily the same as those for men (although three of the interviewees did note that, at least in the past, some programs had been developed somewhat to be more specific to women).
No, I would say that they - what's out there is out there. It's not gender-sensitive. Forklift driving, for example, is forklift driving. There's a manual, it's not developed for men and for women.
A couple of CORCAN staff members (2/5) also spoke to the fact that they devoted more time to programming for male than for female offenders. Some reasons for this greater focus included the larger number of male offenders, a stated desire not to interrupt therapeutic programs for women, or a lack of physical space for employment programming at the women's institutions. However, a few respondents also noted that there had been an increased focus on employment for women in the recent past.
Oh definitely, men are a larger population, but because nationally, I guess, the focus has been moving toward meaningful employment for women, we have been dedicating more time to try to help [Institution Name removed] with that.
Availability of Employment Programming
Many staff members (50/72; 69%) 26 reported a general lack of employment or meaningful employment opportunities within women's institutions. Staff spoke to the fact that not enough training and employment was available, programming was not meaningful or challenging, or that programming was lacking in certain skill areas. Moreover, a couple of respondents mentioned that if might be particularly difficult to provide employment programs or services to certain populations, particularly maximum security women.
Not challenging or meaningful enough - the women will return to selling drugs or prostitution as it is quick, easy cash rather than working minimum wage.
We have difficulty introducing meaningful employment opportunities because of our small numbers in comparison to male institutions.
I think that we don't have enough jobs to keep the women busy. Just the other day someone said why are all these women lying outside in the sun when everybody is employed but two women. And I thought, well that's true but they certainly don't have enough work to keep them busy for a full day. For example, if somebody's cleaning a floor in the morning do they need to come back and clean it in the afternoon? Well they're doing that but even that doesn't take them two and half hours. We've divvied up the jobs to a point where everybody might be employed but there isn't enough for a full day of work in those jobs and I think women are not getting the same exposure to job skills that men are and we know that's a money issue but the money is just not there.
26Issues discussed in this section were based on the responses of institutional staff members (interviews, n = 18; questionnaires, n = 49) and CORCAN Regional/National staff members ( n = 5).
Difficulties/Challenges Associated with Delivery of Institutional Employment Programs
Resources/Practical Considerations. One common issue raised by both CORCAN Regional/National staff and institutional staff questionnaire respondents (9/54; 17%) was the presence of certain resource-related or practical issues related to the implementation and delivery of institutional work programs. Some examples of these challenges included: lack of space, monetary, or staff resources/support, difficulty attaining security clearances, and the small number of women offenders.
Again, it's challenging because of the space limitations and the size of the population. But, space is the number one. Like, the size of the population, we can…you can tailor a program, even production-based like CORCAN is, for the fact that you might only have, you know, 5 half-time workers. That's what the expectation is, but if you have no space to put it, that's a totally different thing.
My own personal opinion is… I think part of it is the organizational structure of [Institutional Name Deleted]. It doesn't mimic the male institutions, so there tend to be, you know from an employment point of view, we're talking to the [Job Title Deleted], we're talking to the [Job Title Deleted], we're talking to the [Job Title Deleted], we're talking to 6 different people that often don't communicate amongst themselves or don't accept responsibility, or it just seems to be not a good fit and often, very often, things just fall right off the rails. And I think that because of that sort of funny organizational structure, you've got people with very fragmented responsibilities. And so, it's not that they're busy…they're usually extremely busy, but they're doing sort of diverse things that typically in another set-up would have been more streamlined.
Other Therapeutic/Programming Needs. Both CORCAN Regional/National staff and institutional interviewees highlighted the necessity of addressing women's multiple needs (e.g., family issues, substance abuse problems, lack of self-esteem, educational deficits/learning disabilities) and the issue of balancing these needs (17/23; 74%).
However, that being said, there is a challenge because there are programming needs that, like I said earlier, sometimes take precedence over employment needs. And, I think our challenge is to balance those, and make sure that they are - they are given the same weight. As we were talking about earlier, you know just, swinging that pendulum, so that there is a balance…it's the holistic approach. Don't over-program, and then forget about employment, and then have 11 house-cleaners.
Overall, institutional staff interviewees seemed to recognize the potential for difficulties scheduling employment programs versus other necessary programming, but their responses varied widely in terms of the degree to which they perceived scheduling to be a problem or in terms of the necessary steps needed to deal with this issue. 27For example, initial comments to this question ranged from “not really” to “it's definitely a challenge”. Furthermore, whereas some staff suggested that only minor scheduling changes and accommodations were needed, others suggested that it was quite difficult to schedule programs, particularly if the offender had a short sentence combined with a lot of needs and thus many programming requirements to complete in a short period of time.
What I find is that for a woman that's here for a shorter period of time, if there's high needs, then there's some limitations, because then she would probably have a fair number of correctional programs to complete and she, for example, has a low education level, then you know she's got a lot of upgrading to do, plus all her correctional programs. And then in terms of employment placements, well, usually she won't probably spend quite as much time being employed, because she's probably in school and in programs. So, I would say that for shorter term offenders, with high need, yeah there is some challenges.
However, most institutional staff reported a fair degree of flexibility with respect to employment and other programming. Many simply seemed to perceive this issue to be a reality that had to be dealt with by prioritizing women's needs, careful scheduling, and through the continued capability of work supervisors or program facilitators to be understanding of other programming needs (e.g., go to another program for a few hours/days, and “make-up” the material they missed later).
27Of note, three respondents from Fraser Valley Institution for Women indicated that since the institution was new, the full range of programs were not yet offered at the time of data collection, thereby leaving little opportunity for scheduling difficulties to present themselves at this time
Resistance to Institutional Employment Programming
Staff members were also asked to describe their support for employment programming or any perceived resistance to employment programming by staff in general. First, institutional staff members were asked to rate the degree to which they agreed or disagreed that institutional employment programming should be abolished. Overall, staff members tended to disagree with this statement 28.
Institutional staff questionnaire respondents ( n = 51) and CORCAN Regional/National staff interviewees ( n = 5) were also asked whether they perceived any resistance to employment programming on the part of institutional staff. Approximately one-quarter of these respondents (15/56; 27%) expressed some perceived resistance to employment programming by institutional staff members. The most commonly noted concerns were related to issues of security (5/56), or characteristics more closely linked to the program implementation or operation (6/56).
As one might expect, given their daily experiences within the institutions, the presence of security issues or concerns was raised by institutional staff members. For example, some staff members suggested that employment programming might require greater dynamic security, and others questioned the degree of respect and support for employment programming versus security considerations within the institution.
Because of the lack of respect for security processes and security staff, I think there is a barrier which will create suspicion and resistance.
The second issue mentioned by a few institutional staff and CORCAN Regional/National staff members was related to characteristics associated with program implementation or operation . Issues discussed in this context, included, for example, some skepticism regarding the “quality” of institutional employment programs or a perceived lack of staff or resources to implement and supervise employment programs.
28 Items were rated on a scale of 1 to 5 with higher scores representing greater disagreement with the statement by staff ( M = 4.60, SD = 0.53).
… I don't think there's any, sort of, mean-spiritedness to it. I don't want to come across as that way at all. I think it's just - it's really hard to pull off in that tiny institution. And I think it's really hard to pull off in a very small compound, and they don't have the room and…
Additional comments were made by staff, that, although infrequent (2/56), may be worthy of mention here. These staff members appeared to question women's desire or right to work within the institutions.
The women don't seem to appreciate the opportunities and staff are tired of this attitude.
I have heard rumours of the women being trained to do administrative work at the institution. I believe that if this happens, the administrative staff currently employed at the institution won't be pleased and I do believe that their union will have something to say about it.
Support for Work Releases and Community Involvement in Institutional Employment
Overall, staff reported at least some degree of support for the involvement of external agencies in the management of institutional programming and training (see Table 10). In addition, the majority of staff members (62%) agreed that efforts should be directed toward employing as many offenders outside the institution as possible, for example, on work release. A separate question was also asked of institutional staff to determine whether they thought that work releases were “a good idea”; almost all institutional staff members (48/49; 98%) responded affirmatively. 29 Some of the discrepancy between the percentages of institutional staff members who responded affirmatively to these two questions may be a function of the security concerns noted by some staff members when they were asked to elaborate upon their responses to the second question (“Do you think that work releases are a good idea?”). Specifically, several staff members
29Note that this question was separate from the rating scale questions shown in Table 10. This question was dichotomous, simply requiring a “yes” or “no” answer, which may have also lead to a different response set for staff members completing the questionnaires.
(5/49) were careful to note that they perceived work releases to be a good idea if the women possessed a minimum security classification or as long as the selection of candidates was done appropriately. Thus, it would appear that staff members are supportive of work releases for many (e.g., minimum security), but not all, women offenders.
Table 10: Degree of Support for Work Releases and Involvement of External Agencies in Employment Programming
|
n |
M |
SD |
% Agreement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
External Groups Should Provide Training in Institution |
49 |
1.82 |
0.93 |
84% |
Should Employ as Many Offenders as Possible Outside Institution (e.g., Work Release ) |
50 |
2.40 |
1.11 |
62% |
Some Institutional Employment Programs should be Managed by Private Companies |
49 |
2.69 |
1.21 |
53% |
Note . Items were rated on a scale of 1 to 5 with lower scores representing greater agreement with or greater perceived veracity of the statements by staff. Percentage agreement was calculated by determining the percentage of total respondents who circled “1” or “2” for the question indicating that they at least somewhat agreed with the statements or that they thought the statements were at least somewhat true.
Moreover, institutional staff reported a number of potential benefits of work releases. These included benefits specific to the employment domain (26/49; e.g., as a vehicle for realistic employment experience or future employment possibilities in the community), as well as the potential for “psychological” benefits for the women (5/49; e.g., increased confidence, self-esteem).
Work releases often bridge the gap between training and practical experience. Work releases help offenders understand the end goal. Women who have only been trained in an institution are not able to carry the skills into the community. Work releases provide building of self esteem and real experience. This is a positive thing.
Almost half of the institutional staff respondents (25/49) also described the use of work releases as a link to the community (e.g., gain experience and contact with the community, promote gradual or more successful reintegration ) and a few staff members (3/49) actually noted that work releases may provide a test of women's abilities and progress with regards to work or community reintegration.
These women are released back into society sooner or later so it is crucial to make this transition as easy as possible. In fact, there needs to be some overlap in the reintegration process which is where work releases are totally appropriate. Many women also need help to find work and will continue in that position once released if they've had support during and after release. This is where CSC doesn't always do a great job.
One final point of interest was the dialogue regarding the impact of work releases on public perception of offenders (3/49).
Because the women can and have integrated into the work force and have behaved appropriately like the majority of citizens in society. This promotes or puts people in favour of offenders' reintegration in society and having a job, giving their services, to exercise their potential and their creativity and encourages the women to maintain a positive attitude.
Although two institutional staff members suggested that positive work experiences in the community had the potential to promote favourable attitudes towards offenders on the part of community, one respondent suggested that there might be some resistance to work releases by community members.
This is a hard question for me. On one hand, I see them as being good for the women. On the other hand, if the women work at jobs in the community that may be able to be filled by someone who isn't incarcerated, then I know the public won't be happy. That being said, I'm concerned that the women will get placed in crummy jobs on work release so that the public won't get upset and then what good will it be for them to get experience working at a crummy job. I'd hope that their being on work release would show a potential employer that they are motivated and a hard worker no matter what the job they were doing on work release.
Balancing Rehabilitative Goals and Financial Concerns
Two types of information related to this question were obtained. First, institutional questionnaire respondents were asked to respond to a series of questions rating the degree of importance of various goals for institutional employment programs (e.g., development of work skills, development of positive attitudes, or financial goals) as well as the degree to which they agreed with various rehabilitative versus financial orientations to employment programming. Second, CORCAN Regional/National staff members were asked to discuss the issue of achieving balance between operating an efficient, cost-effective agency and the need to deliver programs and services to meet offenders' needs and facilitate reintegration.
Table 11: Staff Ratings of Importance for Goals Regarding Employment Programming, N = 51.
|
M |
SD |
% Perceiving Goal to be Important |
|---|---|---|---|
Work Skills/Opportunities |
|
|
|
Develop Minimum Qualifications Necessary for Job |
4.80 |
0.45 |
98% |
Provide High Level of Specific Vocational Skill |
3.90 |
1.08 |
69% |
Secure Job Placement for Inmates Being Released |
3.84 |
1.09 |
66% |
Positive Attitudes/Behaviour |
|
|
|
Develop Positive Attitudes Toward Work |
4.73 |
0.53 |
96% |
Develop Attitudes Favourable to Living Law-Abiding Life |
4.73 |
0.60 |
96% |
Constructively Occupy Time of Inmate Population |
4.61 |
0.63 |
92% |
Financial Goals |
|
|
|
Accumulate Sufficient Savings For Release |
4.04 |
1.02 |
73% |
Earn Funds for Paying Debts, Fines, Restitution |
3.35 |
1.37 |
53% |
Enable Inmates to Contribute to Support of Families |
3.45 |
1.15 |
47% |
Earn Funds for Commissary Purchases |
3.20 |
1.08 |
41% |
Provide Low Cost/Quality Goods for Available Market |
3.00 |
1.26 |
37% |
Help Underwrite Cost of Corrections |
2.94 |
1.19 |
27% |
Make Profit for CSC |
1.98 |
0.95 |
4% |
Note . Items were rated on a scale of 1 to 5 with higher scores representing greater perceived importance of the goal by staff .
Institutional staff members' ratings of the importance of various goals for employment programming were presented in Table 11. A high percentage of staff appeared to perceive several goals that might be considered to enhance offender rehabilitation to be relatively important. Some of these goals included the development of work skills (e.g., developing minimum qualifications necessary for job, providing a high level of a specific vocational skill, securing job placement for inmates being released), or the development of positive attitudes/behaviours (attitudes towards work, attitudes favourable to living a law-abiding life, constructive use of time). With respect to financial goals , although moderate support was observed for some goals related to helping offenders to accumulate funds for themselves, their families, or for restitution, little support was observed for goals related to financial gain or restitution for CSC.
Similar findings appeared when institutional staff were asked to rate various rehabilitative and financial orientations to institutional employment programming (Table 12). For example, the majority of institutional staff suggested that rehabilitation should be a more important issue in employment programming than concerns related to profit or loss. Similarly, the majority reported that pressures to make employment programs profitable could interfere with training or rehabilitative goals. Thus, overall, staff tended to perceive goals related to the rehabilitative functions of employment programming to be fairly important, but appeared to see less value in financially related goals or objectives.
CORCAN Regional/National staff members were also asked to discuss the issue of achieving balance between operating an efficient, cost-effective agency and the need to deliver programs and services to meet offenders' needs and facilitate reintegration. Of the four CORCAN Regional/National staff who responded, one appeared to see these issues as reflecting somewhat conflicting goals.
But, there still remains somewhat of a disconnect. And it's hard because CORCAN, as a separate operating agency, has a mandate to make money at this stage which is unfortunate because making money does not always mean that you are getting employment skills. Making money for CORCAN does not mean that you're necessarily well-trained to get a job when you get out. So, that sort of “forked-tongue mandate” remains…that's got to change. That's definitely got to change in order to pull this off better. Because really corrections is not about making money with CORCAN. It should be about getting these people out and making sure that they stay out.
Table 12: Degree of Support for Rehabilitative or Profit Orientations towards Employment Programming, N = 51.
|
M |
SD |
% Agreement |
|---|---|---|---|
Employment Programs Should be Judged First by Contribution to Rehabilitation and Second by Profit/Loss |
1.51 |
0.73 |
94% |
Parole Board Should Place Considerable Weight on Performance in Employment Programming if Employment Identified as Risk Factor |
1.84 |
0.74 |
88% |
Development of Job Skills More Important Than Profit in Selecting Prison Industry Operation |
1.82 |
1.02 |
86% |
Pressure to Make Employment Programs Profitable can Interfere with Training and Rehabilitative Goals |
2.31 |
0.91 |
63% |
Compared to Other Programs, Prison Industry Job Should be Less Important for Parole Recommendations |
3.10 |
1.19 |
41% |
Profit Orientation Necessary for Realistic Work Atmosphere |
3.18 |
1.21 |
37% |
Note . Items were rated on a scale of 1 to 5 with lower scores representing greater agreement with or greater perceived veracity of the statements by staff. Percentage agreement was calculated by determining the percentage of total respondents who circled “1” or “2” for the question indicating that they at least somewhat agreed with the statements or that they thought the statements were at least somewhat true .
However, the remaining three respondents appeared to perceive little current difficulty managing and balancing these goals, suggesting, for the most part, that the needs of offenders came first.
Well, it's gonna be - I think, it's obviously going to be more expensive, because you're not going to have as many people going through, or being able to access the service, or accessing the program or whatever. But I think that that's just understood that is a factor. No, I think it's just understood that it will be more expensive because you don't have the population base, but that's just a cost of doing business.
In summary, the majority of institutional staff and CORCAN staff members appeared to place a fairly high value on the use of employment programming to support skill development and rehabilitative functions for offenders. Some institutional staff members also expressed concern that pressures related to financial concerns might undermine these goals. Among CORCAN staff members, there was some concern expressed regarding potential conflict between competing financial and rehabilitative goals, but the majority of CORCAN respondents suggested that they felt an appropriate balance or approach to these two potentially competing goals had been achieved.
Summary
Overall, staff members who participated in the study appeared to be quite knowledgeable regarding women's interests for employment. Despite some suggestions by a few staff members that there had been improvements in the area of employment programming for women recently, the majority of staff seemed to perceive several problems related to the current state of programming, specifically related to a deficiency of meaningful employment opportunities and training, a lack of resources, and some challenges related to the need to balance employment needs with other needs for institutional programming. Overall, most staff respondents also appeared to be supportive of employment programming and training for women offenders, although some concerns were noted, particularly with respect to the potential for additional dynamic security concerns that might be associated with greater employment training or placements, or due to current issues associated with program implementation or operation (e.g., the perceived poor quality of some current employment programming or lack of appropriate resources). Similarly, the majority of staff members reported being supportive of work releases for women offenders, at least for those who were perceived to be low risk (e.g., minimum security). Finally, most staff members appeared to be supportive of rehabilitative goals related to employment programming, but less so of financially motivated orientations to employment for women offenders.
Community: Employment, Interests, and Beliefs
Results just presented provided a fairly broad overview of employment experiences, opportunities, attitudes, and beliefs related to institutional employment programming. In this section, the focus of the paper shifts toward a description of employment experiences and interests in the community. First, interests for employment and intentions to work in the community upon release (reported by incarcerated women offenders) are presented. This is followed by a review of occupational information for unemployed women on release in the community (jobs they are searching for; reasons for unemployment, etc.), and then a summary of the occupations reported by women offenders on release in the community who were employed at the time of the study.
Incarcerated Women Offenders
Intentions to Work and Importance of Employment. Almost all (57/58) incarcerated women offenders indicated that it was at least somewhat important for them to have a job. Most also (50/58) reported that they did intend to find a job on release, 6/58 reported that they might be looking for a job at release, and 2/58 women indicated that they did not intend to find a job on release. Reasons for not seeking a job upon release included: needing to complete other education programming/deal with other needs first, being pregnant, and being past retirement age. When asked about their chances of finding a job upon release, about half of respondents (27/55) thought that their chances were “good” and the other half (28/55) thought that their chances were only “OK” or “poor”.
Career Interests. Incarcerated women were also asked about their future career interests (see Table 13). Overall, the most common areas of interest for future careers 30 appeared to be among Sales and Service Occupations (45% of women), with the food and beverage industry; retail, sales, or cashier work; and animal care or training being some of the most commonly reported interests within this category. This was followed by interest in Business, Finance, and Administration (e.g., administrative, clerical, secretarial); Trades, Transport and Equipment Operators (e.g., “trades”, construction); Social Science, Education, Government Service, and Religion (e.g., social work, counselling); and finally Art, Culture, Recreation and Sport (e.g., designer, interior decorating, graphics). Less than 10% of women reported any interest in the remaining occupational categories. Also see Appendix T for a more detailed description of the types of job interests women reported within each occupational category.
30 Since the exact nature of women's career interests and the degree to which they had engaged in thinking and planning with respect to career development was unknown at the beginning of the study, two types of questions were included: an “open-ended” question simply asking women to describe their career interests, as well as a list of possible career choices were included in the questionnaires. Given that the majority of women provided clear indications of their career interests in response to the “open-ended” question, and the fact that it was perceived that responses to the “open-ended” question would provide a less biased accounting of women's interests, only these responses (“open-ended”) were included in the summary of career interests presented in Table 13.
In addition to the analysis of offenders' career interests, there were some comments made by a small minority of women that appeared worthy of further consideration. Some of these comments could reflect a lack of real career goals and interests, or perhaps the perception that their options might be so limited as to preclude choice in the matter. Samples of a few of these comments are shown below.
I want to find a job where I'll be accepted no matter my criminal record or one that is willing to train me to where I'm good at what I'm supposed to do. It doesn't really matter what the job is.
Carpenter, hostess, nanny, grocery store, just anything that would help me get back on my feet with social assistance.
I am wanting to find out before release (I am willing to take what I can get).
Anything.
Table 13: Number (Percentage) of Women Inmates Reporting Career Interests in Various Occupational Areas
|
Career Interests – Incarcerated Women Offenders (n = 58) |
|---|---|
Sales and Service Occupations |
26 (45%) |
Business, Finance and Administration Occupations |
16 (28%) |
Trades, Transport and Equipment Operators and Related |
14 (24%) |
Social Science, Education, Government Service, Religion |
11 (19%) |
Occupations in Art, Culture, Recreation and Sport |
8 (14%) |
Health Occupations |
4 (7%) |
Processing, Manufacturing and Utilities |
4 (7%) |
Natural and Applied Sciences and Related Occupations |
3 (5%) |
Occupations Unique to Primary Industry |
2 (3%) |
Other |
17 (29%) |
Note . The total percentages for the overall categories sum to more than 100% as many women listed future career interests in more than one general category of work (e.g., employment interests in Sales/Service as well as Business/Finance/Administration). Also note that only 54/58 incarcerated women offenders listed their career interests in response to the questionnaires. However, percentages were reported out of the total 58 questionnaire respondents so that the numbers would reflect the total percentage of the sample that reported interests in each area, and also so that the percentages presented in this table might be more directly compared by the reader with other results presented in other sections of the paper, such as the percentage of women with prior employment experience in these areas (Table 8) or with qualifications for jobs in these areas (Table 9).
Women Offenders on Release in the Community
Income and Employment. Twenty of 32 offenders (63%) in the community who responded to this question indicated that they were employed outside the home at the time of the study. However, when asked to describe their main source of income at the time, only 14/34 (40%) of women reported that employment was their main source of income. Thus, some of these women appeared to have been relying on other sources of income as well. Other main sources of income listed included: unemployment insurance or disability (4/34; 12%), welfare/social assistance (4/34; 12%), or spouse/family (4/34; 12%).
Job Search and Reasons for Unemployment. Of the community respondents who were unemployed at the time of the study, 10/12 (83%) reported that they intended to, or might try to find a job , and 6/12 (50%) indicated that they were searching for work at the time. Unemployed women reported an average of 24 jobs applied for since release and an average of 6 hours a week looking for work. A few of these women (3/11; 27%) thought that their chances of finding a job in the next 6 months were good, but the majority of them (8/11; 73%) thought that their chances were only “OK” or “poor”. Reasons for unemployment included: being unable to find a job (3/12), attending school (3/12), unable to work for disability or health reasons (2/12), and working in the home caring for children (1/12).
Job Satisfaction, Pay, and Association with Prior Training . About half of the employed women on release in the community (11/20; 55%) reported that they were either somewhat or very satisfied with their current job . Average reported weekly salaries for women's jobs in the community at the time of the study (take-home) was $374.80 (SD = 183.82; n = 15), and 8/20 (40%) reported that they were somewhat or very satisfied with their current pay level . However, most reported that that their current salary was adequate to meet their basic needs (13/18; 72%) and that their chances of keeping their jobs for the next 6 months were good (15/19; 79%).
Of those who were employed in the community, the majority (13/20; 65%) reported that their current employment was related to work experience they had prior to incarceration . Accordingly, women reported little association between their current employment and institutional work or training : vocational training programs (2/19; 11%), CORCAN work experience (0/20; 0%), or employment skills training programs , (2/20; 10%).
Occupational Descriptions. Similar to women's reports of employment prior to incarceration (reported earlier in Table 6), the largest percentage of women who were employed in the community at the time of the study appeared to be employed in Sales and Service; or in Business, Finance, or Administrative occupations (see Table 14).
Also note that a more detailed description of offenders' jobs and interests is presented in Appendix U. Among those who were searching for work , the overwhelming majority (67%) were searching for employment in the Sales and Service occupations; followed by Business, Finance, and Administration (17%); and Trades, Transport, and Equipment Operators (17%; see Table 12). Finally, when asked what types of jobs they had applied for since their release, almost all of the unemployed respondents who were currently searching for a job indicated that they had applied for at least one job in the Sales and Service area (5/6), followed again by applications to jobs in the Business, Financial, and Administrative occupations (3/6).
Table 14: Number of Women in the Community Sample with a Current Job or Searching for a Job in various Occupational Categories.
|
Employed: Current Job (n = 20) |
Unemployed & Searching for Job (n = 6) a |
|---|---|---|
|
|
|
Sales and Service Occupations |
7 (35%) |
4 (67%) |
Business, Finance and Administration Occupations |
6 (30%) |
1 (17%) |
Trades, Transport and Equipment Operators and Related Occupations |
2 (10%) |
1 (17%) |
Social Science, Education, Government Service, Religion |
2 (10%) |
0 (0%) |
Processing, Manufacturing and Utilities |
1 (5%) |
0 (0%) |
Health Occupations |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Occupations in Art, Culture, Recreation and Sport |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Natural and Applied Sciences and Related Occupations |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Occupations Unique to Primary Industry |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Other |
2 (10%) |
2 (33%) |
a) Although six women noted that they were currently searching for a job, only four listed specific types of employment for which they were currently searching.
Note . Total percentages for the overall categories sum to more than 100% as some women reported that they were searching for more than one type of job within or across different job classification groups .
Summary
Among those who were incarcerated or unemployed in the community at the time of the study, most reported that they did intend to find a job, and about half of those unemployed in the community reported that they were searching for a job at the time. The most common area of interest for a future career as reported by incarcerated women was the sales and service occupational group. Other areas of moderate interest included: business, finance, and administration; trades, transport and equipment operators; social science, education, government service, and religion; and art, culture, recreation and sport. Only about half of incarcerated women and about one-quarter of unemployed women in the community thought that their chances of obtaining employment were really good.
Among women who were employed in the community at the time of the study, the most common areas for employment included sales and service; and business, finance, and administration. They appeared to be moderately satisfied with their current employment and salaries, and fairly optimistic about their chances of keeping their jobs in the future. The majority reported that their current jobs were related to their work experience prior to incarceration, and women employed in the community reported little association between their current employment and past institutional training.
Beliefs Regarding Women Offender's Occupational Abilities
Women Offender Self-Reported Capabilities
Women offenders were asked to describe their confidence in their abilities to conduct several job-preparation or job-search activities. Overall, the majority of women indicated that their abilities in each of the three areas assessed were good to excellent: create a good résumé (60/89; 67%), know where to look for a job (63/89; 71%), perform well during a job interview (66/89; 74%).
Women were also asked to report their feelings of self-efficacy for performing job-related tasks via the Occupational Self-Efficacy Scale. Women offenders ( n = 91) perceived their abilities to be quite good in each of the three areas of self-efficacy explored: work performance (M = 4.11, SD = 0.59) learning ability (M = 4.05, SD = 0.61), organizational/social competence (M = 3.95, SD = 0.61). Average scores tended to be around “4” on a 5-point scale, indicating that they rated their perceived abilities in the employment domain to be relatively high 31.
Institutional Staff Members' Beliefs Regarding Women Offenders' Employment Capabilities
Given their experience observing women at work in the institution and the importance of institutional staff input and support for future employment programs and initiatives, institutional staff members were also asked to describe their perceptions of women offenders' employment capabilities (i.e., “do you think that women offenders make good workers?”).
A number of institutional staff members (11/42; 26%) provided virtually unequivocal positive feedback regarding women offenders' employment capabilities, indicating that most or all women offenders were good workers or at least had the potential to be. For example, staff indicated that women “work very diligently”, “possess many skills”, “pay a great attention to detail and appear mostly more motivated than male offenders”, and “seem to take pride in their accomplishments”.
However, other staff discussed several factors that might lead to poor work performance. Two themes were evident in these responses. First, many staff (17/42; 40%) indicated that some women had certain characteristics or needs that might preclude or mitigate positive work performance. Some issues discussed included: lack of desire or motivation, prior skill deficits, lack of self-esteem (or greater need for positive reinforcement), antisocial attitudes, or difficulties in other areas of their lives (addictions, mental health difficulties) that mitigated positive work performance.
31There were no differences between groups (incarcerated vs. community; younger vs. older; or Aboriginal vs. non-Aboriginal) with respect to self-efficacy perceptions.
A second theme centered on characteristics of the institutional work environment or opportunities (14/42; 33%) that might impact upon women's work performance. For example, several staff questioned the ability of current institutional employment programs to provide adequate training and challenges for the women or the ability of staff to appropriately supervise employment placements.
Yes they have the potential to be as we get a whole cross section of the population. We have a range of very hard workers to individuals who are non skilled and used to relying on social systems. We have, at times, educated and skilled women. Many times our institutional jobs do not promote adequate learning and challenges.
There is no accountability or meaningful sanction for women who do not report to work or who have performance issues. It is too easy for over-worked staff to look the other way when a women sleeps all day, leaves work early, or does a poor job.
Women are not really held accountable for their work related responsibilities and attitudes, thus staff compensate or put up with much more than the work world would – re. attitude & work quality & proficiency. This does not mean they are not trainable as I believe they are but do need the right workplace environment.
Other staff (6/42; 14%), however, appeared to hold little belief or hope for positive change in offender attitudes or behaviours in the realm of work.
Only a minority of them are good workers. The majority don't want to work and they change jobs regularly, etc.
Many women believe they will be supported as they always have been [i.e., partners or gov't assistance]. They are not interested in saving money as currently we supply almost all of their needs. Many are lazy and find excuses not to work.
By what I see and hear, it seems that they are entitled to the carefree lifestyle and the CSC employees should cater to their whims and wishes.
Summary
Overall, most women offenders appeared to be fairly confident in their abilities to engage in various job search activities and to conduct employment-related tasks. This view appeared to be shared by most institutional staff members, although a small minority of staff respondents did express some fairly negative views in this respect, views that appeared to see most women as unmotivated or even incapable of performing in this area. A fair number of staff members, however, did express some concerns that women might have other personal needs that might influence their ability or desire to work, or that current institutional employment opportunities and supervision might not provide adequate challenges to enable women to utilize their capabilities to the fullest.
Relationships, Families, and Social Support
Living Arrangements and Child Care
In general, the majority of community women offender respondents indicated that they were living alone (34%) or with a spouse/partner (30%), while the majority of incarcerated women expected to be living in a hostel/half-way house (30%), or with their spouse/partner (23%) upon release (see Table 15). Almost half of women offenders (38/92; 41%) reported having at least one child under the age of twelve and just over one-quarter of questionnaire respondents (25/91; 27%) reported that they were caring full-time for their children at home prior to their incarceration . With respect to child-care arrangements post-release , 13/34 community women (38%) indicated that some or all of their children were living with them (or expected that they would be within the next year), and 24/57 incarcerated women (42%) expected that some or all of their children would be living with them upon release.
Table 15: Current (Community Women) or Expected (Incarcerated Women) Living Arrangements on Release.
|
Current Living Arrangements Community Women (n = 33) |
Expected Living Arrangements Incarcerated Women (n = 57) |
|---|---|---|
Husband/Wife, Common-Law, Boy/Girlfriend |
30% |
23% |
Family |
18% |
18% |
Friends |
3% |
0% |
Alone |
34% |
12% |
Strangers (Hostel, Half-way House) |
15% |
30% |
Don't Know, Not Arranged |
----- |
17% |
Almost all of the women (incarcerated or community) whose children were living (or were expected to live) with them upon release reported that there was someone who could care for their children if they decided to work (28/37; 76%). When asked who could care for their children if they decided to work, most respondents who had (or expected to have) their children living with them reported that family members or friends (e.g., spouse, parents; 25/37) and/or other paid care-givers (e.g., day-care, babysitters; 10/37) could be utilized to provide child-care.
Family Support for Employment
Women offenders were asked to complete the family support scale that primarily assessed offenders' feelings about emotional support in the face of stressful or dissatisfying work experiences (e.g., “I have people in my family that I can talk to about the problems I have at work.”). The overall mean level of family support reported by offenders 32 was slightly above average on a 7-point scale (M = 5.29, SD = 1.40), indicating a moderate degree of support from family during stressful employment experiences 33.
32Only 75% of institutional participants and 88% of community participants completed this scale. Participants were instructed to complete the scale only if they had current or previous work experience to reference when responding to the questions. Thus, those who did not complete the scale likely had either no previous work history, or no family members to consider when completing the measure.
33 Employing a significance level of .01 to control for the number of comparisons, the degree of perceived family support did not differ according to place of residence (institution or community), ethnicity, or age.
Women in the community were also asked a few additional questions to determine the degree of employment-related support they received from family members (spouse or important others). The majority reported that they received good support from family members for finding or keeping their jobs (24/33; 73%) and that their family members believed that having a job was important (27/34; 79%).
General Social Support for Employment
Participants also completed the Social Support for Employment instrument to determine: 1) Affective Ties: the degree to which respondents affiliated with other employed individuals, and 2) Resources/Models: the extent of their resources or positive role models for employment. Items were rated on a 4-point scale with higher scores representing greater social support. On average, offenders reported a moderate to high degree of affective ties to employed individuals (M = 2.92, SD = .88) and moderate to high access to resources or positive role models in the employment arena (M= 3.19, SD = .48). However, several differences were observed with respect to place of residency, race, and age (see Figures 8 to 10). Overall, results indicated that women living in the community at the time of the study reported greater affective ties to employed individuals than women who were incarcerated. 34 Similarly, older women offenders reported greater affective ties to employed individuals than younger women offenders. Finally, non-Aboriginal women reported greater access to employment resources and positive role models than Aboriginal women offenders. More detailed statistical information for these analyses is provided in Appendix V.
34Recall that the instructions for this measure differed slightly for institutional versus community participants. Due to their circumstances, incarcerated women offenders were asked to think about the places they lived and the people they knew prior to incarceration and women in the community were asked to think about their current living circumstances .
Figure 8: Degree of Affective Ties to Other Employed Individuals Reported by Community and Incarcerated Samples.
Figure 9: Degree of Affective Ties to Other Employed Individuals Reported by Older and Younger Women Offenders.
Figure 10: Degree of Access to Employment-Related Resources and Models Reported by Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Women Offenders.
Note: All comparisons shown in the graphs were significant at p < .01.
As another way to assess perceptions of social support, women offenders in the community were asked who they would seek assistance from if they needed help to obtain a job or to support themselves in the community. The most common responses included various social services such visiting “employment centres”, or using “unemployment”, or “welfare” (12/34). Others indicated that they would approach specific agencies such as John Howard Society (7/34), Elizabeth Fry Society (7/34), OPEX (4/34), or Correctional staff such as their parole officers (6/34). A few also noted that they would approach family or friends (7/34) or that they would search for jobs on the internet (5/34).
Summary
Overall, just over one-quarter of women offenders reported that they were caring for their children full-time in the home prior to incarceration, and a little over one-third of questionnaire respondents expected that their children would be living with them upon release. However, the majority of those who reported that they would have their children living with them upon release perceived that they would have care-givers available to care for their children (mostly in the form of family members) should they decide to work. In addition, most women reported moderate to high support from family members finding or keeping employment and when faced with stressful work experiences. Similarly, relatively high social support, with respect to ties to other employed individuals and access to employment-related resources, was reported by women offenders. It is important to note, however, that incarcerated women and younger women reported fewer affective ties to employed individuals and that Aboriginal women offenders reported less access to employment-related resources and positive role models. Overall, offenders also reported knowledge of several sources of possible aid in obtaining employment or financial assistance, including various community services and agencies, as well as family or friends, and independent internet job searches.
Employment Services/Programs in the Community
As discussed in the previous section, women offenders reported moderate to high support from family and others in the employment domain. Thus, the next objective was to assess more directly the nature of and interest in employment services available to women in the community, as well as offender and staff awareness and perceptions of these services.
Interest in and Use of Employment Services by Women Offenders
First, women were asked about prior participation and future interest in employment related programs while on release. Half of women in the community reported that they had visited an employment counsellor (17/34; 50%) and about one-quarter reported that they had participated in job training programs or workshops (8/34; 24%) since their release. In addition about half of women offenders in the community reported that they were interested in participating in employment programs during their release (17/33; 52%). When asked what types of programs or services they would find useful, the most common response was to describe interest in more training or a certain type of employment (8/17; e.g., computer training, food industry). Other types of interests listed included: links to jobs or employers (4/17), résumé writing/interview skills (4/17), and information regarding job-search techniques (3/17).
Those who had not previously participated in employment programming in the community (or who were not interested in participating in any in the future) were asked to describe their reasons for their lack of interest or use of these services. Some of the most common reasons noted included: perceptions that they already had the skills or ability to obtain a job without assistance (9/16), the fact that they already had a job (6/16), nothing was offered/available (6/16), or that they were not working/unable to work due to school/disability/health/children (5/16).
In order to determine how women might connect with employment services on release, community parole officers were asked how women were assigned or referred to employment programs or services in the community. Parole officers (11/11) suggested that they assisted in connecting women with employment services, indicating that they made referrals to available programs or services as needed. A few also noted that referrals might also be made to appropriate employment services by Community Residential Facility or “half-way” house staff (2/11), or that the women might identify and access some services themselves (2/11).
Awareness of Employment Services in the Community
Given that many offenders reported interest in participating in employment programs during their release, and the potential role of staff in assisting women to any existing programs, women offenders and staff were asked whether they were aware of any employment programs or services in the community. The majority of staff and offenders did report some awareness of employment-related services. Among incarcerated and community offenders, the majority (51/85; 60%) reported awareness of at least one employment services in the community, listing anywhere from 1 – 6 different types of services or programs. The majority of institutional staff interviewees (13/18; 72%) also reported some knowledge of employment services in nearby communities, with individual respondents listing from 1 – 4 different programs or services. As one might expect, knowledge of community employment services appeared to be particularly high among community staff members (see Table 16). Community participants responding to this question (community parole officers and CEC staff; 21/25; 84%) listed anywhere from 1 – 9 different services or agencies that might be available to women offenders.
Offenders and staff reported knowledge of several different types of services which appeared to range from community-based or provincial programs to larger national programs. Some of the services listed by women and staff included Human Resources Development Canada 35, John Howard Society, Elizabeth Fry Society, OPEX, or Emploi Québec. CORCAN services or Community Employment Centres were also listed by staff, but not by offenders. Other services described were more difficult to categorize, with some simply making reference to “employment agencies”, “placement agencies”, or “welfare programs”, or general listings of places to look for jobs (e.g., newspapers), and others listing what appeared to represent local community services, or local colleges where offenders might pursue their education. Overall, services and agencies listed appeared to include those related directly to employment (employment or skills training, job-search or preparation) or services that might indirectly lead to greater employability for women offenders (e.g., by providing education, life-skills, self-esteem development, or assistance with practical issues such as transportation).
35Now known as Human Resources and Skills Development Canada .
Availability and Difficulties Associated with Community Employment Programming
Parole officers in the community and Community Employment Centre (CEC) staff noted some issues related to sufficiency of community employment programs and services. A number of staff members (16/25) suggested that there was at least some degree of insufficiency or problems related to programs and services in the community. For example, some suggested a lack of programs in a specific occupational or educational area (4/25; e.g., “trades”, “computer training”). A few community staff members also suggested a lack of resources for community employment programs (3/25),
They really don't have the space and resources offered to allow them…you know they never seem to get in. There's either not the space or the funding is not there. There's all these reasons why they don't get hooked up with the ones that they want.
Parole officers were also asked whether they perceived any difficulties scheduling employment programming for women. There was some indication on the part of a few community parole officers (3/11) that employment training or work opportunities might conflict with other programs. However, others (5/11) suggested that they were fairly good at working things out and being flexible so that few difficulties occurred. For example, some staff indicated that these were things that could be worked out either through flexibility or creative scheduling with respect to other programs or through understanding and sensitivity on the part of the employer to allow for some flexibility to attend programming. A couple of respondents (2/11) also noted that there was little opportunity for conflict since few core programs were offered in their communities.
Support for or Resistance to Community Employment or Programs
Community parole officers and CORCAN Regional/National staff interviewees were asked whether they perceived any resistance to employment programming on the part of staff in the community. The majority of respondents (11/16) did not perceive much resistance to employment or employment programming in the community. A few (5/11) did note some potential issues. However, their concerns appeared more related to problems with current processes/practices (e.g., local processes for referrals) or staff perceptions that employment might interfere with other important needs/programs (e.g., substance abuse), rather than any actual resistance to employment programming per say.
Community… it's always been strong. Work is - there's no issue in the communities as far as - if a guy's at - if a women's at work, you know, or actively occupied, productively occupied, they're not going to be coming back in. I think that's - community parole officers are, in general, very supportive of that. In the institution, I think we have more work to do.
Summary
Overall, offenders appeared to possess moderate awareness of employment services and staff to possess moderate to high levels of awareness of various employment-related services in the community. Additionally, about half of women offenders reported some interest in accessing employment services, particularly those that might provide links to employers, or information regarding résumé writing, interview skills, or job-search techniques. Interestingly, aside from those offenders who reported that they did not need to use employment services in the community (i.e., already had job, could find one on their own, did not intend to work), the only other relatively commonly mentioned issue was the perception that no employment services were offered or available. A number of staff members also expressed some concerns regarding the availability of employment services in the community, reporting either a dearth of services in certain occupational areas (e.g., computers, trades), lack of resources for community employment programs, or few links (between service areas or between offenders and employers) in the community. Despite some concerns about the current state of employment programming, however, community staff members did appear to be supportive of employment and employment programming for women offenders.
Focus on Community Employment Centres
CORCAN funds several Community Employment Centres (CEC) designed to provide employment services to offenders. In order to determine the potential influence of these centres for enhancing women offenders' employability, women on release in the community were asked to description their awareness of, interest in, and use of the centres. CEC staff members were also asked to describe their perceptions of women offenders' employment needs and interests.
Awareness of Community Employment Centres
When CEC staff members were questioned about women's awareness of the centres, about half (6/13; 46%) felt that their methods were successful. The remaining respondents felt that their methods were somewhat successful (4/13; 31%) or not successful (3/13; 23%) in reaching the women offender population. When women offenders in the community were questioned about the centres, a little over one-third (13/33; 39%) reported that they had been aware of the Community Employment Centres at the time of the study.
Women and staff were also asked to identify sources of information regarding the CECs (see Table 16). Some of the most common sources reported by both staff and offenders included various organizations in the community, such as Community Residential Facilities and other non-CSC government or community agencies (e.g., HRSDC, Elizabeth Fry). One women offender and several staff members also reported that other offenders or clients of the centre might also provide information. A few other sources of information were reported primarily by CEC staff, and included mostly sources of information related to CSC, the most common of which was parole officers. A few CEC staff members also reported the use of publicity or active promotion of their centre through the use of various methods (e.g., electronic newsletters, presentations to various individuals/organizations, visiting women's institutions, etc.).
Table 16: Sources of Information About the Employment Centres Reported by Community Women Offenders and CEC Staff
Sources of Information about CECs |
Women Offenders (n = 13) |
CEC Staff (n = 14) |
|---|---|---|
Community Residential Facilities (“Half-way Houses”) |
4 |
6 |
Community or Government Agencies (e.g., Elizabeth Fry; HRDC) |
4 |
5 |
Other Offenders/Clients/”Word-of-Mouth” |
1 |
6 |
“Institutions” |
1 |
4 |
Parole Officers |
1 |
9 |
Probation Officers a |
0 |
5 |
CEC Promotions |
0 |
4 |
“Correctional Service of Canada” |
0 |
2 |
a) Probation officers were likely a greater source of information for provincial offenders who might have been using the centre than for federal offenders.
Client Base and Women Offenders' Use of the Centres
With respect to their clientele, respondents from two of the Centres (4/14; 29%) indicated that they catered primarily to Federal offenders, but most of these individuals also reported that they made services at the centre available to offenders following completion of their sentence as well. One of the respondents provided the following information.
Note – writer always has offered post-sentence support. I believe it is good corrections as well as personally supportive to ‘leave the door open'. With women in particular they build more of an emotional attachment and at times need their choices confirmed or just to relay how they're making out presently.
The remaining respondents indicated that their services were accessible to a wider range of clients (10/14; 71%). The majority of these individuals (9/14; 64% of respondents from eight Centres) reported that their clientele also generally included provincial offenders and “ex-offenders”, and a few also indicated that their Centre was also accessible to non-offenders or simply “anyone needing employment assistance” (3/14; 21% of respondents from two Centres).
CEC staff reported that anywhere from zero to four women offenders visited their Centres on any given day, and reported that, on average, about 8% of their clientele was female. Results obtained from questionnaires distributed to women in the community indicated that a few women (5/32; 16%) had previously visited a Community Employment Centre. Those who had, reported little that they liked about the Centres, although one woman stated that she had found the Centre to be helpful. The most common complaint reported by women offenders (3/5) was the inability to access jobs through the Centre and the most common suggestion for improvements to the Centre was to increase access to jobs for women through the centre (2/5).
I went thinking I was going to get help looking for work, but she only seems to have employers for men. She said she is busy – she has in excess of 200 men.
Staff Reports of Women Offenders Employment Needs and Interests
Given their experience working with offenders and the potential importance of their roles in helping women offenders to obtain employment in the community, CEC staff members were asked to describe their perceptions of women offenders' needs and interests for employment. As well, information was gathered regarding women's use of Centre services and types of employment obtained through the Centre.
Women's Employment Needs. First, in order to identify any needs that women might have that might need to be addressed separately or differently from men, CEC respondents were asked whether they perceived the employment-related needs and experiences of men and women to differ. Almost all CEC respondents (13/14; 93%) responded affirmatively. Several staff indicated that women had a greater focus on (or responsibility for) family and children (6/14; 43%), or greater criminogenic or “personal” needs (3/14; 21%; mental health, self-esteem) that might interfere with their desire or ability to work. Several staff (4/14; 29%) reported a higher perceived level of skill or work experience for men than women prior to incarceration, and a few (2/14; 14%) noted differences between men and women with respect to institutional employment experience as well (e.g., more exposure to the trades, industry, training during incarceration for men than for women offenders).
Often, women are caring for children and are not as flexible to shift work and to certain jobs. Men are often more flexible and are often able to get the higher paying jobs. Men may often have a longer history of employment whereas women (due to children) may have less employment history to put on their job applications or résumés.
Finally, several respondents reported different perceived job interests for women than men and/or the different hiring practices associated with these types of jobs (4/14; 29%).
There is a difference linked to the types of jobs that they can do. More diversity for men. The hiring process is more traditional for jobs usually occupied by women (interview for example) so women have to be better prepared even if they are more skilled.
Women tend to focus on traditional and non-traditional fields of employment. Women tend to cover a broader spectrum of work. Men tend to work in more common sectors, i.e., construction and manufacturing.
To summarize, Community Employment Centre staff were asked to describe the services and skills that they thought women offenders needed in order to increase their chances of obtaining meaningful work. The most common service or skill areas listed by staff included: skills training/certification (e.g., computer skills, trades; 9/14), educational upgrading/assistance (7/14), assistance with other personal/criminogenic needs (e.g., counselling, self-esteem building, life skills training; 7/14), employment preparation (e.g., interview skills, résumé development; 3/14).
Women's Use of Centre Services. CEC staff were also asked to describe women's use of Centre services. None of the respondents described any services directed specifically or exclusively for women at their Centres, although one respondent noted that they had an employment counsellor working in one of the federal women's institutions, and another respondent indicated a contract with another organization that did provide services specifically for women. With respect to the services women did utilize, the three types of Centre services reported most commonly by CEC staff to be used by women included 36: employment counselling , résumé writing , and job search services (see Table 17). It would seem that most of the services utilized by women at the Centre would fall under the general category of “ employment preparation ”, which is one of the services that CEC staff perceived that women needed in order to obtain meaningful employment. However, CEC staff did report use of other services, such as educational upgrading which was also commonly noted by staff as a services needed by women, as well as some use of job training or certification programs (e.g., WHMIS)
Note that CEC staff responses to this question are supported by National data collected by CORCAN with regards to the types of employment services offered to women for the previous fiscal year (April, 2003 to March, 2004). Similar to the reports of questionnaire respondents, results of National data gathered by CORCAN indicated that the most common employment services placements 37 for women in 2003-2004 included: one on one counselling ( n = 112), résumés/cover letters ( n = 95), and internet job search services ( n = 92).
36Women offenders in the community who had previously used the Community Employment Centres were also asked what services they had used at the centres. However, since very few offenders had previously used the centres and the response rate to this question was so low, we were unable to describe women's self-reports to this question in the present paper.
37 Note that these represent “service placements” not the number of women, so it is possible that some women may have received these services more than once. Also note that national data is not collected for the Quebec region; therefore the information reported here includes data obtained only from the other four regions ( Atlantic , Ontario , Pacific, Prairies) .
Table 17: Services Used by Women Offenders at the Community Employment Centres (CECs) as reported by CEC staff .
Community Employment Centre (CEC) Services |
Number of Staff who Reported Use of the Following Services by Women (N = 12) |
|---|---|
Employment Counselling |
12 |
Résumé Writing |
12 |
Job Search |
12 |
Interview Preparation |
9 |
Office Resources (computers, phone) |
7 |
Educational Upgrading |
9 |
Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) |
3 |
Aptitude and Assessment Testing |
5 |
Other |
6 |
Note . Two CEC respondents indicated no or little knowledge of women's use of either the centre or its services and so were unable to comment upon women's use of services .
Occupational Information. Community Employment Centre staff were also asked to describe their perceptions of the jobs that women offenders were searching for when they came to the centre as well as the types of jobs that they obtained through the centre. Overall, the majority of staff seemed to think that women were searching for jobs in the areas of Sale and Service; and Business, Finance, and Administration (see Table 18), and also that these were the areas in which women were most likely to obtain work.
Table 18: Number (Percentage) of Community Employment Centre (CEC) Staff (n = 11) Reporting That Women Search For and Obtain Employment through the CECs in Each of the Occupational Categories .
Occupational Category |
Searching For |
Obtain |
|---|---|---|
Sales and Service Occupations |
9 (82%) |
10 (91%) |
Business, Finance and Administration Occupations |
9 (82%) |
7 (64%) |
Trades, Transport and Equipment Operators and Related Occupations |
2 (18%) |
1 (9%) |
Processing, Manufacturing and Utilities |
2 (18%) |
1 (9%) |
Social Science, Education, Government Service, Religion |
1 (9%) |
0 (0%) |
Health Occupations |
1 (9%) |
1 (9%) |
Occupations in Art, Culture, Recreation and Sport |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Natural and Applied Sciences and Related Occupations |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Occupations Unique to Primary Industry |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Other |
3 (27%) |
4 (36%) |
National data were also collected by CORCAN regarding the number and type of job placements obtained through the Community Employment Centres. Based on data for the fiscal year beginning in April 2003 and ending in March 2004, results indicated that the three most common types of job placements 38 obtained by women offenders through the CECs included: employment in call centres ( n = 17), administrative support positions ( n = 14), and employment in the retail industry ( n = 8). All three of these types of employment fall into the general categories of Sales and Service; or Business, Finance, and Administration, therefore lending support to CEC questionnaire respondents statements regarding the areas in which women are likely to obtain employment.
38 Note that these represent “job placements” not the number of women, so it is possible that some women may have obtained more than one job through the centre and may have been represented more than once, and placements may reflect either full-time or part-time positions. Also note that national data is not collected for the Quebec region; therefore the information reported here includes data obtained only from the other four regions ( Atlantic , Ontario , Pacific, Prairies).
Future Use of Community Employment Centres
Despite the fact that relatively few women had previously visited one of the Community Employment Centres, slightly more than half of women in the community reported that they would be interested in using the Community Employment Centres in the future (19/33; 58%). Reasons for interest in using the Centres listed by women offenders included: help finding a job/getting better wage (8/19), appreciate any assistance/help in general (4/19), help with résumé development (2/19), overcome barrier of criminal record (since employers would already be aware; 2/19).
Right at the moment I'm in treatment, I know how hard it can been looking for employment. It took me 6 ½ months to find a job that paid good wages. If there is other ways or more ways I'm willing to try anything right about now.
Because if I can get a job where my criminal record won't be an issue then that would be a great opportunity for me.
Women who reported that they were not interested in using the Community Employment Centres were asked about their reasons for their disinterest. Moreover, most CEC staff members (11/12; 92%) provided some indication that more women offenders should be using the centres 39. Thus, they were also asked to report upon their perceptions as to the reasons why women might not be making as much use of the Centres as they could.
Responses of community women offenders and CEC staff are presented in Table 19. The most common reasons for not wanting to use the Centres reported by women offenders included the fact that some women already had a job or that they felt that they were able to obtain a job without any assistance, a desire to disassociate from their “past” (criminal record) or CSC, or the fact that they were unable to work at the time due to a disability or as a result of child-care responsibilities. Most of these issues were also raised by CEC staff members, along with some other suggestions that women might be more likely to utilize organizations that specialized in services for women, or that women might be less interested in working or making the effort to find a job.
39 Note, however, that several respondents (3/11) did indicate that there were fewer women offenders to begin with, which might account, at least in part, for the small number of female clientele.
Reasons for Not Utilizing Centre |
Women Offenders (n = 14) |
CEC Staff (n = 14) |
|---|---|---|
Already Have Job |
3 |
0 |
Desire to Disassociate from “Past”/CSC/Criminal Record |
3 |
1 |
Independent/Able to Obtain Job Without Assistance |
2 |
2 |
Practical or Personal Issues Prevent Work (Disability, Health, Children, Transportation) |
2 |
3 |
More Likely to Utilize Services Specialized for Women |
0 |
3 |
Not Interested in Working |
0 |
2 |
CEC staff members were also asked how to increase women's awareness or use of the Centres. Two main themes emerged from their responses. First, CEC staff suggested promotion of the Centres (9/14; 64%), highlighting the importance of initiating contact and maintaining communication with offenders and staff in other locations. Several suggestions for promoting and informing women offenders about the Centres were provided, including encouraging cooperation and communication with parole officers (6/14), or promoting knowledge and awareness of the Centres in the institutions prior to release (9/14; e.g., information sessions provided by CEC staff at the institutions, offenders visit the CECs during temporary absences). Finally, greater communication with other community agencies was also suggested (5/14; e.g., at “half-way houses”, Elizabeth Fry). A few staff members (2/14) also suggested the use of promotional material such as pamphlets, brochures, or videos to describe and promote their services to the above noted individuals.
A second theme was related to suggestions to increase resources or services (4/14; 29%) offered by the Centre, most of which appeared designed to address some of the perceived needs of women offenders, such as additional computer resources, assistance with transportation costs, providing child-care during centre visits, providing programs designed to address mental health needs, or providing other services specifically for women (e.g., dedicate part-time counsellor to work just with women, hold employment workshops for small groups of women).
Summary
Overall, awareness and use of the Community Employment Centres among women offenders in the community might be described as relatively low to moderate, although the level of awareness was somewhat higher than the reported use of the Centres. Interestingly, women offenders were most likely to hear about the Centres from various community agencies (e.g., Community Residential Facilities or non-CSC agencies), but only a few reporting learning about the Centres from the institutions or their parole officers. A few questionnaire respondents reported using the Centres and data collected by CORCAN indicated that some women offenders had utilized centre services (e.g., counselling, résumé development, job search), and that a few women offenders had obtained jobs through the Centres. Some of the most common areas of employment obtained through the Centre by women appeared to be in sales and services as well as business, finance, and administration. CEC staff members also appeared to be relatively knowledgeable about women offenders' employment interests. In order to increase women's awareness and use of the Centres, staff suggested greater promotion of the Centre and the ability to offer more services to women offenders (computers, transportation, child-care, counsellor specifically for women).
According to offenders, the most common complaint raised by those who had visited the Centre appeared to be the inability to access jobs through the Centre, and the most common reason listed by women for their interest in using the Centres in the future was to obtain assistance getting a job or obtaining a job that would enable to the get a better wage. On the other hand, reasons for disinterest in using the Centres appeared to be fairly similar to their reasons for not using employment services in general (did not need assistance, had a job, did not intend to work). One other finding was observed specifically with reference to the CECs though, in that a few offenders reported a lack of interest in using the Centres due to a desire to disassociate from their criminal past or from CSC in general. Interestingly, a few other offenders expressed almost the opposite view, indicating a desire to use the CECs specifically because it might address issues related to the potential barrier posed by their criminal records (i.e., employers would already be aware of their criminal record and still be willing to hire them).
Links, Communication, and Standardization across Services Areas
Links and Similarity between Institution and Community Employment
Several different types of information were solicited to determine staff members' perceptions of links between institutional and community employment programs and opportunities. First, institutional staff questionnaire respondents were asked to respond to a relatively structured set of rating-scale questions related to the perceived similarity between institutional employment programming and employment in the community. Second, staff respondents from the institution and community (institutional staff, community parole officers, CORCAN Regional/National staff, CEC staff) were asked several open-ended questions to determine problems with current programming and perceptions of links between the institution and community programming. Due to the different types of information obtained from the two different methods, data collected through the use of rating-scale and open-ended questions are discussed separately below.
Rating Scale Questions. Results of institutional staff members' responses to the set of questions regarding links or similarities between institutional and community employment or training are provided in Table 20. Overall, the majority of staff seemed to think that institutional employment programming should be similar to employment in the community (e.g., should produce similar goods, require similar operations, offenders should work a full 8 hour day). However, few institutional staff respondents thought that paid vacations should be provided to inmates who work in employment programs for long periods of time. Also, although institutional staff members appeared to think that institutional and community employment should be similar, only about half of the respondents (or fewer) seemed to think that this was actually the case (few work skills are acquired by offenders, offenders use skills learned in the community, artificial work environment in the institution cannot prepare offenders for the community). Moreover, only 14% of institutional staff members believed that the work expected by offenders in the institution was equal to that expected by employers in the community. However, it is important to note that few institutional staff members suggested that it was impossible to make the work situation in the institution similar enough to that in the community to make it a valuable experience for offenders. Thus, even though less than half of staff respondents seemed to see much of a current link between institution and community employment, the majority of institutional staff respondents did not seem to think that this link was unattainable.
Table 20: Links and Similarity between Institutional and Community Employment Reported by Institutional Staff Questionnaire Respondents (N = 51 )
|
M |
SD |
% Agreement |
|---|---|---|---|
Offender Working in Institution Could be Good Worker in Community |
1.53 |
0.67 |
94% |
Employment Programs Should Produce Goods and Require Operations/Skills Similar to Community a |
1.84 |
0.91 |
88% |
Inmates Should Work Full 8-Hour Day a |
1.88 |
0.94 |
78% |
Employment Programs Do Not Provide Real Vocational Training , but Rather Minimal On-The-Job Training |
2.59 |
0.96 |
57% |
Few Work Skills/Habits Acquired by Offenders |
2.82 |
1.16 |
49% |
Artificial Work Environment in Institution Cannot Adequately Prepare Offenders to Function in Community |
2.94 |
1.27 |
47% |
Offenders use Job Skills Learned in Institution in Community |
2.92 |
1.02 |
39% |
Impossible to Make Work Situation in Institutional Like Community to Make a Valuable Experience for Offenders |
3.57 |
1.28 |
31% |
Paid Vacations Should be Provided to Inmates Who Work in Employment Programs for a Long Time a |
3.48 |
1.33 |
28% |
Union Membership Should be Obtained for Inmates with Training in Jobs Requiring Such Membership a |
3.28 |
1.16 |
24% |
Work Expected by Offenders in Institution Equal to that Expected by Employers in Community |
4.00 |
1.04 |
14% |
Prison Employment Threatens Jobs of Non-Offenders |
4.22 |
0.97 |
8% |
a) Some missing data evident on these questions, N = 50
Note . Items were rated on a scale of 1 to 5 with lower scores indicating greater agreement with or greater perceived veracity of the statements by staff. Percentage agreement was calculated by determining the percentage of total respondents who circled “1” or “2” for the question indicating that they at least somewhat agreed with the statements or that they thought the statements were at least somewhat true.
Open-Ended Questions. Staff members from all areas surveyed 40 were asked to comment either about any problems with employment programming, or to comment directly on the degree of linkages between the institution and community. Overall, several respondents (26/98; 27%) expressed concern regarding current linkages between programs or opportunities in the institution and the community. For the most part, staff either addressed the fact training was not necessarily offered in occupational areas in which the women were likely to find work in the community, or that institutional employment represented an unrealistic work environment.
Inmates work very few hours, their effort is poor, they spend much of the working hours doings things other than working. It is an artificial work environment – does not mirror society.
No real training to speak of; therefore no real accountability or performance appraisals relevant in the real work world. Work skills training – menial and minimal work expectations and attitude - minimal expectations. Ratings on performance appraisals of women which foster a false belief that they do a good job ‘cleaning' for example.
Links definitely need to be made because there are many programs on the inside that have no link to the community.
40This included institutional staff questionnaire respondents ( n = 51), institutional staff interview participants ( n = 18), community parole officers ( n = 10), CORCAN Regional/National staff ( n = 5), and CEC staff ( n = 14).
However, other staff members (19/98; 19%) 41 expressed at least some degree of perceived link between institutional and community employment programs or opportunities. However, responses varied somewhat in terms of the strength of the link and the types of programs that were perceived to link across the two situations. For example, a few respondents reported a somewhat stronger link between institution and community in recent years, but that there were still some areas for improvement. Others suggested that some basic skills might transfer to other jobs regardless of the occupation (e.g., being punctual), or that some institutional employment programs might link directly to the same type of employment in the community. Examples of jobs or training that staff suggested might have direct linkages to community employment included: canine program, cleaning, landscaping/maintenance, clerical, graphics,construction, warehousing/supplies, food industry, hairdressing, sewing, floral programs, or various “volunteer programs”.
Well, if they want to be office night-time cleaners or house-cleaners, then "yes", they have the qualifying skills. Also, I guess maintenance or yard-work, or supplies. I guess that might link to warehousing, but even that - these days it's so computerized that the work they do in supplies here probably doesn't even compare. But, I guess that's about it.
41 Note that 26/98 reported fairly negative views and 19/98 reported at least some positive perspective with respect to linkages. The remaining 53 respondents were CEC staff and institutional staff questionnaire respondents who simply did not raise the issue of “links” as a concern in response to the open-ended question asking them to describe any problems with institutional employment programming .
CORCAN Regional/National staff also had some additional comments to make regarding services that might help to create or maintain a link between the institution and community. Most commonly noted by these staff members (4/5) was the relative importance of the Community Employment Centres (CEC) in creating and maintaining linkages between these two areas (e.g., by visiting the institutions and providing employment counselling services to the women, attending institutional job fairs, making institutional presentations). One CORCAN respondent also suggested that positions such as hers were important in this regard since she was responsible for overseeing both institutional and community initiatives and provided a link between the two.
No, well, there is more and more, because of, sort of, people like me that are responsible for coordinating both ends of it. So there is more dialogue between the two groups. And of course the employment counsellors in the community are telling me where they're getting parolees jobs, so I'm turning that into vocational opportunities in the institution.
CORCAN Regional/National Staff: Roles and Links/Communication
Given their potential roles in both the institution and community, CORCAN Regional/ National staff members were asked to provide further information about their roles and to describe their perceptions of current levels of coordination or sharing of information across various services or regions. In general, CORCAN staff described their roles as providing employment services to offenders in the institutions and/or community. However, there appeared to be some differences in their roles from region to region. One respondent noted the following.
So we've, we've kind of established a direction, and we've gone that way, which may or may not be different from the rest of the country, but I expect it is. Because, I know that I've attended meetings in the [Region deleted], and it's totally different than what we do here. We also have a different geography than the rest of the country.
CORCAN Regional/National staff also differed somewhat with respect to the proportion of time and resources they reported directing towards the institution versus the community. The majority of CORCAN staff (3/5) reported a somewhat greater focus on programs and initiatives at the institutional level, one noted a greater focus on the community , and one simply indicated that she was responsible for both institutional and community initiatives or programming. Of note, one of the interviewees also reported that one of their goals for the year was to work on institution-community bridging.
CORCAN staff also suggested that it was important to maintaining relationships with a number of individuals and organizations in order to carry out their roles. Several respondents (3/5) suggested that it was important to maintaining relationships with various CSC staff in order to implement EEP objectives (e.g., programming staff, management services employees, reintegration staff, operational staff, district directors, CEC staff, and parole officers).
Oh, I think it's across the board. We need to…we have to be in tandem with Programs, with Management Services, with Reintegration, and Community. It's really…this is why this is such a challenge, because it's such a cross-section. There, employment services are offered through all those areas, so it's a real challenge to get all those people together and then move it forward, move these things forward.
Additional important contacts noted by staff (3/5) were other government agencies such as Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, the Parole Board, and the Ministry of Education. Finally, most staff members (4/5) also mentioned the importance of links with other non-profit agencies or local organizations (e.g., John Howard Society, St. Leonard's Society, Elizabeth Fry Society, Conference Board of Canada, Habitat for Humanity, Salvation Army, “homelessness” initiatives, St. John's Ambulance, local school boards, trade unions, community colleges).
CORCAN Regional/National staff members were also asked to describe the degree to which information was shared across institutions or regions. In general staff members tended to respond with respect to at least one of two topics: communication within regions or communication across regions .
Communication Within Regions. Of the three respondents who spoke to the level of communication and sharing of information within regions , perceived communication at this level was generally acceptable to good, with information being exchanged with other regional staff by email or through meetings several times a year. However, one of these respondents did voice some concerns regarding the level of information imparted to parole officers in the region.
I think what's lacking, and it's an issue, are the Parole Officers themselves who are, you know, they're basically doing the counselling with the offender and doing the dialogue and I think that is a bit of an issue that they may not be as aware of some of the opportunities that are out there as they could be or should be.
Communication Across Regions. The other area that all CORCAN Regional/National staff chose to address was the sharing of information across regions . Overall, the majority of respondents perceived the degree of communication across regions to be somewhat less positive.
In terms of Nationally, I haven't got a clue what's going on in other regions in terms of their training.
Like I said, I know that I've had meetings where we're discussing different initiatives. I don't feel that the line of communication is all there, because there would still be grey areas as to how the implementation took place, or where the funding came from to buy the equipment or, you know, those types of things…We have Regional Working Committees that include NHQ people, but as far as my Counterparts across the country, we don't really have that connection to discuss “best practices” or anything like that. We're kind of in our own little worlds.
There is not a lot of information that circulates between regions with respect to employment. Other than that, there isn't a lot. For women this is especially true. There is not a lot of communication because it is a fairly closed network.
Summary
Overall, the majority of staff members did appear to perceive at least some linkages across services areas (e.g., institution and community) with respect to employment for women offenders. However, a number of staff also raised some concerns in this area, suggesting, for example, that institutional employment represented un unrealistic work environment for women and that further work needed to be done to ensure transferability of skills from the institution to the community, or that women might be unable to obtain work in some of the areas in which they had received training while incarcerated. CORCAN staff suggested that it was important to maintain relationships with other CSC staff and various external organizations to carry out their roles and also noted the importance of the CECs in maintaining links between the institution and community. CORCAN staff also seemed to perceive that communication and sharing of information was fairly good within regions, but expressed less positive views of the level of communication across regions (e.g., little knowledge of training or programs in other regions or opportunities to discuss “best practices”).
Beliefs Regarding Importance, Advantages, and Barriers to Employment
In order to obtain greater information regarding offender and staff perceptions of the importance of employment and the issues facing women offenders attempting to obtain work in the community, the following factors were explored: the importance of employment and employment programming, perceived advantages and disadvantages of employment, and barriers to employment for women.
Importance of Employment and Employment Programming
Offender Perceptions. Some information regarding the value and importance women offenders attributed to employment was obtained from one of the indicators from the Attitude Domain of Offender Intake Assessment (“Employment has no Value”). Results indicated that 66 of the 718 women offenders (9%) from the snapshot population (OMS, May 1 st , 2004) perceived employment to have no value. Results 42 also indicated that a greater percentage of the institutional population (12%) than the community population (6%) perceived a lack of value in employment, c 2 (1, N = 718) = 8.38, p < .01. Furthermore, a greater percentage of younger women offenders (12%) than older women offenders (5%) perceived that employment had no value, c 2 (1, N = 711) = 9.50, p < .01. No significant differences were observed for comparisons of Aboriginal versus non-Aboriginal women offenders.
Some additional information regarding the importance of employment programming as perceived by offenders and staff was obtained. First, incarcerated and community women offender questionnaire respondents were asked to rate the level of importance of employment programming versus other types of institutional programs 43 (on a 5-point scale). Results of a 2-way ANOVA revealed a main effect of group (incarcerated vs. community) and of type of program (employment vs. other programs; see Appendix W for summary statistics). There was a general trend for incarcerated women offenders (M = 4.27, SE = .13) to rate programs as being more important than community women offenders (M = 3.54, SE = .16). Offenders also rated employment programming (M = 4.26, SE = .12) to be more important than the combined ratings of other programs (M = 3.54, SE = .12). Also note that the level of importance assigned to employment programming by offenders was quite high (average score above 4 on a 5-point scale).
42Due to the number of analyses to be performed, results were considered to be significant if p < .01.
43 Other programs included: education, survivors of abuse, counseling, substance abuse, living skills, parenting skills, chaplaincy, Aboriginal programs, Elder counseling, and intensive services. In order to perform these comparisons, responses regarding the importance of all other programs (e.g., substance abuse programming, mental/spiritual health services, etc.) with the exception of employment, were combined for offender responses and for staff responses, to be discussed later. A 2-way ANOVA was conducted to determine the relative importance of employment versus “other” programs by institutional and community offenders.
Offenders in the institutions and community were also asked about the degree to which they thought staff perceived employment programming to be important. Specifically, women offenders were asked to rate the degree to which they perceived employment programming to be considered important by “local staff” 44 and “National Headquarters staff”. Another 2-way ANOVA was conducted to compare the degree of self-perceptions versus perceptions of staff beliefs regarding the importance of employment programming (see Appendix X for a summary of the statistics). Results revealed a significant interaction effect (see Figure 13).
In order to explore the significant interaction, a series of paired t-tests were conducted separately for women in the institutions and in the community to compare their own perceptions of the importance of employment programming versus the degree to which they thought staff perceived employment programming to be important. Among incarcerated women offenders , the level of importance they personally assigned to employment programming was higher than the degree to which they perceived staff to see employment programming as important for women: staff at their institutions, t (1, 52) = 5.68, p <.001, and National Headquarters Staff, t (1, 52) = 5.62, p < .001. However, no significant differences were observed for community offenders between self-reported perceptions of the importance of employment programming and perceptions of staff beliefs regarding the importance of employment programming: community parole officers, t (1, 28) = -.205, p = ns, or National Headquarters Staff, t (1, 28) = .49, p = ns.
44 Thus, incarcerated offenders were asked to rate the degree to which they thought institutional staff members perceived employment programming to be important and women offenders in the community were asked to rate the degree to which they thought community parole officers perceived employment programming to be important.
Figure 11: Degree of Importance of Employment Programming Reported by Offenders (Incarcerated and Community) and Offender Perceptions of Staff Beliefs Regarding the Importance of Employment Programming.
Staff Perceptions. Institutional staff questionnaire respondents were also asked to rate the level of importance of employment programming versus other types of institutional programs. Overall, institutional staff appeared to rate employment programming quite highly. Results of a paired t-test indicated that there was no significant difference in the degree of importance staff assigned to employment programming (M = 4.62, SD = .68) versus other types of programs (M = 4.48, SD = .55), t (1, 46) = 1.57, p = ns. Thus, on average, institutional staff appeared to rate most programs as being quite important.
Institutional staff questionnaire respondents and community parole officer interviewees 45 were also asked to rate the degree to which they perceived employment programming to be considered important for women by other individuals: women offenders, their colleagues (institution or community) 46, and National Headquarters (NHQ) staff.
45Due to the method utilized to obtain information from community parole officers (interviews), we were unable to include the same range of questions that were included in the institutional staff questionnaires. Thus, while parole officers were only asked to rate their own and others perceptions of the importance of employment programming, the additional questions related to the importance of “other” programming for women offenders were excluded from their interview due to the need for brevity.
46 Institutional staff were asked to rate the perceived level of importance assigned to employment programming by other institutional staff and community parole officers were asked about their perceptions related to other parole officers in the community.
A 2-way ANOVA was conducted to compare the degree to which staff perceived employment programming to be important themselves and the degree to which they perceived others to see employment programming as important (women offenders, colleagues, NHQ staff). There was no significant interaction or any significant effect of location (institutional staff versus community parole officer perceptions). However, a significant within-subjects effect was observed (see Appendix Y). Results of pairwise comparisons indicated that staff members rated the importance of employment programming more highly than they perceived others to believe that employment programming was important (see Figure 12): women offenders, colleagues in the institution or community, National Headquarters staff (results were all significant at p < .01 or greater).
Figure 12: Degree of Importance of Employment Programming Reported by Staff (Institution and Community Parole Officers) and Staff Perceptions of Others' Beliefs Regarding the Importance of Employment Programming .
Advantages and Disadvantages of Employment
Advantages. Women offenders were asked to describe any advantages to employment and staff members were asked to describe any advantages to employment or employment training for women offenders. According to women, the most commonly listed advantage of employment was the ability to address material or financial needs or goals, ranging from a simple desire to meet one's basic needs for oneself or one's family to an ability to obtain or maintain a more luxuriant lifestyle (see Table 21). On the other hand, staff tended to emphasize the advantages related more specifically to employment itself (e.g., skill development, career exploration) and the development of self-esteem. These issues were also described as advantages by a number of offenders. Also described as advantages by both staff and offenders were the development of independence or responsibility and the potential to increase positive behaviour or to assist in reintegration into the community. Interestingly, offenders also discussed the development of positive relationships with others as well as earning respect or recognition from others in the context of advantages related to employment.
Table 21: Advantages of Employment for Women Offenders Reported by Offenders and Staff .
|
Offenders a (n = 92) |
Staff b (n = 76) |
|---|---|---|
Material/Financial Goals & Security |
77 (84%) |
13 (17%) |
Positive Feelings/Self Esteem |
43 (47%) |
44 (58%) |
Reintegration/Community Integration/ Constructive Behaviour |
21 (23%) |
30 (39%) |
Independence/Responsibility |
19 (21%) |
5 (7%) |
Develop Positive Associations |
19 (21%) |
0 (0%) |
Respect/Recognition from Others/Role Model |
13 (14%) |
2 (0%) |
Learning/Skill Development/Career Exploration |
14 (15%) |
46 (61%) |
a) Included incarcerated and community offenders
b) Included Institutional staff questionnaire respondents ( n = 51), community parole officer interviewees ( n = 11), and Community Employment Centre staff questionnaire respondents ( n = 14)
Staff members' beliefs regarding the advantages of employment for women were supported somewhat by the perceptions of institutional staff members regarding the changes they reported in women related to employment. Specifically, the majority of institutional staff questionnaire respondents (41/50; 82%) reported some degree of positive change in offenders as a result of employment or employment training. The most common change in women noted by institutional staff (28/50; 56%) was an increase in positive self-regard (confidence, self-esteem, pride, and empowerment). Also noted were positive changes in mood or attitude (11/50; 22%) that staff associated with employment experiences or programming (e.g., better attitude, more motivated, less bored) as well as positive changes in employment-related skills, interests, and attitudes (12/50; 24%; e.g., development of general skills, learning to cooperate with co-workers or supervisors, greater interest or ability to pursue employment in the future following release). Several other comments were made more generally with regards to positive changes and attitudes towards the future and release (8/50; 16%), including positive attitudes or hope for the future or their impending release, greater success on release, and greater hope for providing for their families.
More jovial, polite, and diplomatic. Equally, more self-confidence and she feels more on par with everyone else. I think the women feel like they are contributing to society in a positive manner and feels accepted and respected and therefore she respects herself more and therefore we respect her more as well.
The women who assisted in building the max unit learned useful skills. This boosted interest in pursuing employment on the street and ability to secure a job due to acquisition of valuable construction skills.
Many times when they participate in a work release or employment training program they have confidence and a better sense of their potential and interests for future employment. Sometimes this includes a more realistic picture of what is required in the work force, barriers they may face in attempting to secure work and strategies and resources to utilize in the community.
Disadvantages. Women offenders were also asked to describe any disadvantages 47 to working (see Table 22). Overall, one of the most commonly reported disadvantages or concerns women reported related to employment was the fact that they would have less time for themselves or their families. Offenders also reported some concerns that too much additional stress or responsibility might be associated with their jobs, as well as the potential for poor working conditions such as long hours or low pay. Interestingly, although some women earlier mentioned possible advantages of meeting prosocial people through work, negative relationships with employers or colleagues were also mentioned as a potential disadvantage (e.g., working with difficult or unfriendly individuals).
Table 22: Disadvantages Related to Employment Reported by Women Offenders
|
Offenders a (n = 92) |
|---|---|
Less Time for Self/Leisure/Other Activities |
29 (32%) |
Less Time for Family/Children |
27 (29%) |
Too Much Stress/Responsibility |
24 (26%) |
Relationship Difficulties (Supervisor, Co-Workers) |
18 (20%) |
Poor Working Conditions (e.g., Hours, Pay) |
18 (20%) |
a) Included incarcerated and community offenders.
Barriers to Employment
Just over half of incarcerated and community women offender respondents (48/87; 55%) indicated that they had experienced difficulties or problems looking for work. Given their level of experience with women in the community, community parole officers and Community Employment Centre (CEC) staff were also asked to describe potential barriers/challenges to meaningful employment for women offenders. A summary of offender and staff perceptions of barriers or difficulties associated with obtaining or maintaining employment is shown in Table 23.
47Note that some staff members were also asked to describe disadvantages to employment or employment programming for women offenders. However, their responses to this question were very diverse and appeared, in many cases, to refer to issues that might be described as barriers to employment or issues related to perceived problems with institutional employment programming, both of which are issues that are discussed in other sections of this paper. Thus, only offender responses on this issue are discussed.
Table 23: Barriers or Challenges to Meaningful Employment for Women Offenders Reported by Offenders and Community Staff .
|
Offenders a (n = 87) |
Community Staff b (n = 25) |
|---|---|---|
Lack of Experience/Training |
17 (20%) |
13 (52%) |
Criminal Record |
16 (18%) |
11 (44%) |
Practical issues (Transportation, Identification, Clothing/Appearance) |
11 (13%) |
6 (24%) |
Other Criminogenic or “Personal” Needs |
9 (10%) |
9 (36%) |
Lack of Education |
7 (8%) |
11 (44%) |
Labour Market Issues |
4 (5%) |
0 (0%) |
Lack of Resources or Support |
1 (1%) |
7 (28%) |
Child-Rearing Desires/Responsibilities |
4 (5%) |
15 (60%) |
Additional Barriers for Certain Populations |
2 (2%) |
3 (12%) |
a) Included incarcerated and community offenders. Only 48/87 women reported that they had experienced problems looking for work in the past. However, percentages presented in the table were represented as a function of the number of women who reported each type of problem out of the total number of incarcerated and community offenders who responded to this question. Thus, percentages represent the total percentage of women (questionnaire respondents) who reported prior difficulties in each of the areas described in the table.
b) Included community parole officers (interviews) and Community Employment Centre staff (questionnaires)
Experience. Also noted by both staff and offenders was a lack of work experience, training, or skills . A few staff members also specifically noted the lack of opportunity for employment programs or training within the institution, thereby leaving little possibility for improvement in this area from pre- to post-incarceration.
Well it just seemed like I didn't have enough background jobs to get a job (experience). (Offender)
Missing pertinent experience. They don't have any special skills and there are few non-specialized jobs for women offenders (chambermaid for example requires a background check, cashier). (Staff)
Criminal Record. One factor that was mentioned by a fair number of both offenders 48 and staff, was the barrier posed for women offenders by a criminal record. In fact, some staff members also noted that the types of jobs that women might apply for or be interested in may be more likely to require criminal record checks than those sought by men (e.g., jobs requiring the handling of cash).
Employers who will not even speak to your parole officer; they just discount/write you off without even listening or speaking to a parole officer. (Offender)
Offenders in the community were also asked whether they had ever been refused employment due to their criminal record. Just under half of women offenders in the community (15/32; 47%) reported that they had been refused employment for this reason, anywhere from 1 to 40 times in the past. Most common reasons given by the employer for not hiring women included: the fact that they did not want ex-offenders working for them (9/15), due to the nature of the job itself (6/15), or the nature/type of the women's offence (5/15). Thus, the barrier posed by a criminal record would appear to be a fairly significant one for women offenders released to the community.
Practical Issues. Additionally, various “practical” issues perceived to impact upon the ability to obtain or maintain employment were also mentioned by offenders and several community respondents. Some of these issues included lack of transportation, stable housing, telephone services, or proper identification. Issues related to appearance were also mentioned including physical appearance (e.g., tattoos of which employers might not approve), or a lack of appropriate clothing for the job or interview. Of the issues discussed, perhaps the most commonly raised by both staff and offenders were the issues related to transportation or the need for appropriate clothing for interviews or employment.
48Note that difficulties related to this issue may have been somewhat under-represented here since women were asked to describe any prior difficulties experienced when looking for work. Any incarcerated offenders who were also first-time offenders would not have previously experienced any difficulties in this area, but could potentially experience problems related to their criminal record upon release. In fact, this issue was raised by 11/34 women in the community and only 5/58 incarcerated women.
Criminogenic/Personal Needs. Also noted were other criminogenic or personal issues (e.g., mental or physical health needs, criminal attitudes, lack of self-confidence or motivation, substance abuse issues, or relationship needs or difficulties) that might interfere with the desire or ability to work.
I wasn't motivated enough. I was too unstable. (Offender)
I was using drugs. (Offender)
Education/Experience. Also noted by a few offenders and a number of staff members was a lack of education or educational pre-requisites required for certain jobs. A few offenders specifically mentioned that the lack of a diploma or a Grade 12 education had been a problem for them.
Labour Market. One issue that was raised by a few offenders, but not by staff, appeared to be related to local labour market issues. Specifically, a few offenders indicated that there had been a lack of jobs available in general, or more particularly with respect to the types of jobs they were searching for.
In the province I lived in, the demand for operators was extremely low. (Offender)
Child-Rearing Desires/Responsibilities. Community staff members also suggested that child-care responsibilities or a desire to reunite with their children might impact upon the employment situation for women. Common themes noted in relation to this issue included a focus on family related issues (e.g., regaining custody of their children), as well as the availability of reliable, affordable child-care and the cost of child-care in relation to employment pay (e.g., low-paying jobs are hardly worth having after accounting for child-care expenses). Particularly notable, however, was the discrepancy between staff and offender reports with respect to this issue, with 60% of staff members considering child-rearing responsibilities to be a barrier to employment for women offenders, but this factor was only raised as an issue by one women offender.
I believe women with children, it is hard for them to just get out of institution and get a job and not reacquaint themselves with their children.
Lack of Support/Resources. Additional comments made by one offender and a few staff members spoke to a general lack of support or resources or a lack of awareness regarding re sources by offenders and staff. Comments ranged from lack of support or resources in general, to more specific comments regarding a lack of training or planning prior to release as well as a lack of awareness or eligibility for programs in the community (e.g., like a “Hunt for Red October” to find anything that was available), or huge waiting lists for programs that actually did exist.
My age, my criminal record, no help from corrections or E. Fry, which I expected. I received some leads from E. Fry but most were government jobs and/or companies who won't hire you when you are on parole. (Offender)
Low awareness of programs (employment or training) available within the community by offenders and their PO [Parole Officers]. Lack of pre-release planning relative to long-term goals. Lack of eligibility for HRSD [Human Resources and Skills Development] training (e.g., not EI [Employment Insurance] eligible) – no work release bringing insurable earnings. (Staff)
Additional Barriers for Certain Populations. Finally, a few offenders and staff mentioned that some populations might experience additional problems. Specifically, offenders mentioned “age” as a problem to finding work. In addition, staff members suggested that it might be difficult for older women to go back to school (e.g., psychologically – feeling out of place) or to find a job because the job market might be geared toward younger adults. Other staff suggested that Aboriginal women might be subjected to discrimination that might add to the challenge of finding employment.
Summary
Most women offenders appeared to perceive value in employment, although a greater percentage of younger than older offenders perceived employment to have no value. In addition, offenders and staff seemed to perceive employment programming to be quite important and offenders even perceived employment programming to be more important, on average, than other types of programming combined. Moreover, staff members and incarcerated offenders (but not offenders in the community) seemed to believe that others (staff or offenders) did not perceive employment to be quite as important as they did.
With respect to the benefits or disadvantages of employment, many offenders tended to focus on the material or financial benefits to employment, although other advantages (e.g., increased self-esteem, positive relationships or regard from others, development of skills, positive reintegration) were also mentioned fairly frequently by both offenders and staff. The most common disadvantages related to employment reported by offenders included having less time for their families or themselves or a high degree of work-related stress or responsibility. The most common barriers to employment as reported by both staff and offenders appeared to be the issue of their criminal record and the lack of necessary training or experience. Other issues that were mentioned as disadvantages or barriers to employment by women included practical concerns related to transportation or appropriate clothing, or the need for reliable child-care. It was interesting that child-care issues were noted as a barrier to employment by a large percentage of staff , but relatively few women offenders . It was also important to note, that even though the lack of reliable child-care was not often highlighted as a difficulty that they had experienced related to employment, the fact that they would not be able to spend as much time with their children or families if they decided to work was fairly commonly listed as a perceived disadvantage to working.
Suggestions for the Future of Employment Programming for Women
In order to provide a clear and concise description, all offender (incarcerated, community) and staff suggestions (institutional, community parole officers, CORCAN Regional/National staff, CEC staff) are discussed together in this section. A summary of the major issues discussed by offenders and staff and the percentage of respondents (from each area surveyed) who proposed various suggestions is presented in Table 24. 49 This is followed by a more in-depth discussion of each of the general points listed in the table to provide a more detailed picture of the issues and proposed suggestions.
49The exact nature of the questions soliciting staff and offender suggestions for future directions to employment programming for women varied slightly from one groups of interviews/questionnaires to another depending on factors such as location of residence or employment (e.g., questions for incarcerated offenders focused more on what might be done in the institution to prepare offenders for release and questions directed towards offenders in the community focused more on issues relevant to obtaining a job on release). In addition several different questions were asked of staff and offenders to solicit their suggestions for employment programming (e.g., offenders were asked directly if they had any suggestions to improve employment programming and also whether there was anything that would help them to deal with the problems they had experienced when looking for work in the past). Thus, the nature of responses may vary somewhat simply due to the nature of the questions posed to different samples based on their experiences (offenders versus staff) or locations (institution versus community).
Table 24: Suggestions for Prospective Employment Programming for Women
|
Offenders a |
Institutional Staff b |
Community Staff c |
|---|---|---|---|
|
( n = 92) |
( n = 69) |
( n = 30) |
Employment Preparation |
|
|
|
Career Preparation/ Generic Skills |
13 (14%) |
13 (19%) |
13 (43%) |
Educational Upgrading |
18 (20%) |
1 (1%) |
8 (27%) |
Employment Training/Opportunities |
|
|
|
More or Specific Types of Training |
35 (38%) |
42 (61%) |
24 (80%) |
Consider Women's Interests |
5 (5%) |
10 (14%) |
6 (20%) |
Consider Labour Market |
1 (1%) |
5 (7%) |
11 (37%) |
More Work Releases/ Temporary Absences |
2 (2%) |
10 (14%) |
6 (20%) |
Links for Offenders |
|
|
|
Offender Links to Community Resources/Release Planning |
4 (4%) |
7 (10%) |
3 (10%) |
Offender Link to Employers |
11 (12%) |
9 (13%) |
7 (23%) |
Practical or Criminogenic Needs |
|
|
|
Child-Care |
1 (1%) |
0 (0%) |
4 (13%) |
Other “Practical” Issues |
7 (8%) |
1 (1%) |
5 (17%) |
Other Criminogenic or “Personal” Needs |
10 (11%) |
5 (7%) |
9 (30%) |
Staff-Related Needs |
|
|
|
Resources (Financial/Space) |
0 (0%) |
10 (14%) |
6 (20%) |
More Staff/More Specialized |
1 (1%) |
10 (14%) |
4 (13%) |
CSC Staff Engagement/Communication |
0 (0%) |
9 (13%) |
5 (17%) |
Links Between CSC and Other Agencies |
0 (0%) |
7 (10%) |
5 (17%) |
Policy/Operational Practices |
0 (0%) |
2 (3%) |
3 (10%) |
- Included incarcerated ( n = 58) and community offenders ( n = 34).
- Included questionnaire ( n = 51) and interview participants ( n = 18).
- Included community parole officers ( n = 11), CORCAN Regional/National staff ( n = 5), and Community Employment Centre staff ( n = 14) .
Employment Preparation
Many women and staff members suggested that there was a need for general career planning or the development of generic skills necessary to search for, obtain, or maintain a job (e.g., assessment of interests and abilities, résumé development, interview or job search skills, more realistic work environment to develop work habits, generic employability skills). Many staff members suggested that this process should at least begin during incarceration. Also suggested by both women and staff was the need for educational upgrading .
Have employment symposiums from the different areas. Have résumé writing classes. Have interview classes. Have where to look for a job classes. (Offender)
As well as the educational analysis, skills and interests, vocational inventory should also be done. Find out what skills the women have. Personally, I am more of an educational type person, so one month as an ‘institutional' cleaner was not personally rewarding. (Offender)
More education, with use of these new skills so that I don't forget what I learn. (Offender)
Career assessment tools and career counsellors to assist women to be more successful in career development. A checklist of employability skills should be mastered by the employee. (Staff)
Individual approach to career planning based on clients' needs, wants, abilities, and interests in consultation with labour market of home area. (Staff)
Employment Training/Opportunities
One of the most common suggestions made by both staff and offenders was the need for increased access to training and employment opportunities . The suggested setting for these work opportunities and training, when discussed, was generally the institution. Although many respondents simply indicated that more jobs or employment training were needed, some suggested training in specific skill areas, the most common of which appeared to be training in the “trades”/construction, computer skills/ administration, certified vocational training, or cooking.
Respondents also mentioned that it was important to consider women's interests for employment when planning programs or delivering training. Several staff members also suggested that it was important to consider labour market information (e.g., current demand for certain types of jobs) in the context of career development and choices for women offenders. In the context of institutional programs or training, releases to the community (e.g., work releases or temporary absences), were also suggested as excellent opportunities for women to gain employment experience or assistance.
Offer tangible training programs, have training placements rather than work positions. Have work placement where you can receive tradesman's papers, etc. Get certification. (Offender)
There should be a wider variety of work available within the institution and more training at least (e.g.., flagging course construction). More opportunities for women as it is whether or not admitted important for us to be independent not on welfare. More job training in variety would greatly benefit and perhaps less re-offenders would return. (Offender)
New employment areas – regular P.F.V. cleaner, house cook, recreation coordinator, beauty technician training, certificates from maintenance – plumbing, electrical, carpentry, small engines, landscaper. (Offender)
Increase access to meaningful, marketable-skills based programs that combine work experience in realistic situations with additional skills training re. résumé writing, interviewing, etc. (Staff)
Learn trades that lead to employment in the community. The type of employment they obtain should be able to cover their financial needs. Programs the women enjoy. We should not assume they want ‘gender appropriate' positions. (Staff)
But, the same with male institutions - not as bad, because you don't have the same number of offenders that need to be employed, with the size of the institution, you don't have the number of employment positions either. But you know, like your 12 cleaners for one job and things like that, that's what we want to get away from, and I don't see that as being as big a problem at [Institutional Name Deleted], but it certainly is still there that there are positions or jobs that probably are not full-day, meaningfully employed that are being recorded as that. So meaningful, yes, meaningful. (Staff)
And work releases - I think our key to success is to develop programs within the community, so women can go and work in the community. Because of the space issue, I mean that's the only way we can go. Like, we can't keep saying we have to do employment things - CORCAN has to do employment things, when there's no space. I mean, it has to be recognized, and then what can we do about it. Well, let's see, for those that have low risk, close to release, we should be giving them TAs [Temporary Absences] to go to the Employment Centres to see if they can get work lined-up, or even work. I know it's very successful, sometimes. (Staff)
Links for Offenders
Several women and staff also suggested greater emphasis on release planning or providing offenders with links to community resources for employment. Links to employers in the community were mentioned as important by both offenders and staff. For example, some suggested that CSC should create connections with employers willing to hire women offenders in the community, set up independent employment or training opportunities in the community, or subsidize wages paid by employers in order to encourage them to employ offenders. In fact, a few community staff members noted that there were numerous agencies willing to help women prepare for employment (e.g., create a résumé), but the lack was in the area of creating links and helping women to actually obtain a job. Others suggested that it was important to have a good reference and indicated that CSC staff should provide recommendations or references for women looking for employment. Moreover, several respondents specifically noted that this process (creating links) should at least begin in the institution. An additional suggestion was related to the issue of public perception and acceptance, with respondents expressing a need for understanding on the part of community members and education with respect to the realities of life and barriers to employment for women with criminal records. Thus, some suggested that greater education and information might allay potential fears held by community employers related to hiring offenders.
Maybe some direction from the institution PO [Parole Officer] as to where to start wherever being released to. (Offender)
CSC should have contacts in the community to help women find employment and create jobs for women. (Offender)
A female branch or division that goes to employers (like the old HELP program that John Howard ran). (Offender)
Lists of employers able and willing to employ workers with a federal record. (Offender)
Factory Jobs – where government pays part of the wages. (Offender)
For reference use your Parole Officer. (Offender)
Let the public know that people like us need to make a living. If the crime is not work-related or no matter what it is, we need to live just like anybody else. As I have been looking for a job I have found no way if you have a record. You know, I can even realize why some go back to crime. They can't get what they need. Take me for instance -to be able to live I need a job 8-10 dollars an hour. The job I have now pays that, but I only get part time hours. (Offender)
If there was some kind of link like where they learn certain skills on the inside for example related to customer service and then they walk out into the community and there's already an established job center that does call centres, then they can immediately link up with that and then have some viable employment to start with instead of spending so many months trying to find a job. Something that is already established where it is already understood that they do have a record but that they're trying to make changes. ‘Cause I know that, when I hear what's going on with the men – some linkages made with community agencies where it is already understood that these guys have records but we're going to give them a chance to do this and this and if they work and are steady and do a good job – hey we give them a chance. And the women, if they could have some kind of opportunity where it's already understood, they won't have to overcome those additional barriers to start with. (Staff)
Practical or Criminogenic Needs
The most commonly mentioned “practical” issues related to obtaining or maintaining employment that needed to be addressed appeared to be related to transportation and appropriate clothing for interviews or work. Although some respondents simply suggested that these issues needed to be addressed, other provided more specific suggestions, such as providing women with appropriate clothing or a transportation allowance. A few staff members and one offender also mentioned the ability to obtain reliable child-care as important in the context of obtaining employment.
Find a reliable babysitter. Buy my own vehicle. Save up money or find reliable transportation. (Offender)
Possibly clothing suitable to wear when applying for jobs. (Staff)
In addition to the majority of the suggestions discussed previously that were related fairly directly to employment, both staff and offenders highlighted other criminogenic or personal needs that they felt needed to be addressed (e.g., personal or family-related needs, psychological/medical, substance abuse). The issue discussed most by offenders was related to self-confidence or motivation. Suggestions made by respondents included self-esteem training, peer support, counselling, and a supportive environment. In addition, one staff member utilized the term “holistic” in describing the approach to dealing with women's needs, and several suggested that it was important not to focus on employment needs to the extent that women's other needs were ignored.
Stop using drugs. (Offender)
Women need self esteem training; FIRST – need to know who they are, where their place is, in the world. (Offender)
If it means that you're going to give the women an employment skill but you're going to take money away from programming then I say don't do it. When we start shifting our dollars, this is not what this is about. If they're going to add dollars to do something great but if they are going to take away from basic programming, then no. (Staff)
I do believe that when we're working with females, you need to look at the whole thing - the whole picture - not just focus in on, you know, substance abuse, or employment needs, or whatever. And I know that this is our area is employment, but at the same time, I think that we can't forget about these other areas. (Staff)
Staff-Related
While suggestions discussed previously were related more generally to offender needs related to employment programming, a number of issues were also raised (primarily by staff) with respect to factors that they felt were important more specifically for staff , in order to assist staff to effectively direct employment programming or assist women offenders to obtain access to employment. First, staff members suggested that greater financial or “physical” resources were needed to effectively direct employment programming or services for women offenders. For example, a need for more money for equipment necessary for employment training or to increase space for employment programming in the institutions was noted.
Well, I think in the master redevelopment plans, that there has to be vocational-type area set aside, so that, although it can be used as a classroom or whatever, that it is built with the idea in mind that it may need to be fitted for ventilation, noise-reduction, or all of those types of things that would be in a vocational-type setting. (Staff)
In addition to financial resources, more resources in the form of more staff members dedicated specifically to employment programming or services were also reported to be necessary. Some suggested roles for staff included: implementing institutional employment programs and training, developing work releases for women, providing reintegration services, developing and maintaining links with employers and the community, or working intensively with women in the community to help them obtain and maintain employment (e.g., follow-up support).
Hire someone particularly who is involved in working with the community to develop work release options/employability programs as it really should be a full time job. Having employment it's a major stabilizing effect for women on release. This has been an area overlooked and undervalued for too long as it relates to risk of recidivism. (Staff)
There's been a handful of things that always sort of fall apart at the last minute. I think there has to be someone tasked specifically with it [employment programming] at the institutional level, and someone who's prepared to sort of pull it off. (Staff)
I guess, what I would suggest, is perhaps in every region, I'd like to see a position developed that, you know, a community, I don't even know, at the regional level perhaps, that works specifically around those issues for women. A regional - some kind of a regional position in programs or case management. I don't know, probably, I don't know - progressive case management, I don't know where, but, where it would fit in, reintegration programming somewhere, and in the community, where they work on developing those links, and linking and spending time at the institution, and in the community, and basically working to advance things. I don't have great ideas in terms of…I think you need someone to do that. Like, I think you need, like it needs to be recognized as a need, and I think people need to, you know be probably educated around it. And that might be another part of that person's job, educating parole staff, educating the institution, in terms of things that we can be doing here, that would help, you know that we're not doing, and certainly things that could be happening in the community that, that maybe aren't happening – specifically addressed for women. Anytime you have a portfolio where there's - oh you do this, and, oh yes, and you do it for women - it's not good enough, because it never happens. Like it's just, it's just a - it's just a token - it's tokenized in my mind. I don't, I think we need to be very intentional about having someone dedicated not - not just like a quarter of the time, because their a quarter of the time probably will turn into an eighth of their time, and it's usually what, you know, the majority rules and that's working with men, and, so yeah, that's specifically working with women, and I think they're -a position would be great. (Staff)
Others suggested that all staff members need to be more engaged in the process of helping women to address their needs in the employment domain, or that greater communication and information sharing was necessary (e.g., “collective information sharing”, sharing best practices).
More commitment by staff to ensure employment opportunities/the supervisors need support to recognize their contribution to the women's rehab rather than just get a job done which is frequently their primary responsibility. (Staff)
I think that sharing best-practices is huge. Because we often get word from other institutions, like [Institutional Names Deleted] that something good is going on, but we never get - it's not sent out. In the women's institutions, I think it's very important because it's such a small population, it's such a small community, that anything that's being done that's working needs to be shared, and maybe it is being shared at the [Type of Position Deleted] meetings, or - I don't know, but certainly when we get together to talk about it, there's missing information. (Staff)
Also noted was the need for greater links between CSC and other agencies including greater communication and awareness regarding employment services. It was suggested that CSC needed to network, cooperate, and share information with other service providers in order to provide better services for women offenders.
Offer more partnerships with community schools and businesses for training, development, and work experience. (Staff)
One final issue raised by these respondents was the need for more consideration of current policy and operational practices related to employment. For the most part, issues were raised regarding the importance of the inclusion of employment needs and institutional employment planning within the correctional plan in order to better direct employment programming for offenders as well as the importance of the case management bulletin on employment and employability.
And I think that the other important issue that needs to be addressed, and again this isn't just for women, but because they do intake at [Institutional Name Deleted], is the importance of being placed on employment in the correctional plan. We are not seeing, and we haven't, since operational bypass, seen employment being addressed really well in the correctional plan. And I think that that's an area that needs to be improved in assessing the needs in that area. And then translating that into part and parcel of the correctional plan in the objectives and expected gains, not just under the employment domain analysis. They do an employment assessment at intake. But, this is two years in the making, but we're just now really getting our act together as far as policy and everything with relation to employment in the correctional plan. There's still - we have SOP 700-04, but then we have a Case-Management Bulletin that - it says that - below SOP 700-04 - it says that employment will not be included in the correctional plan unless it is a contributing factor. The Case-Management Bulletin says employment, if it is identified as a NEED, or considerable, whether it's a contributing factor or not will be addressed in the correctional plan. We know that, across the board, including [Institutional Name Deleted], that that's not being done, and we are, as we speak, in the process of changing that, so that it will be addressed in the objectives and expected gains of the correctional plan. (Staff)
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Results of the present study indicated that slightly more than half of women offenders demonstrated employment needs, both at intake to federal institutions and at release to the community. At intake, the majority of women did not possess a high school diploma, were lacking in a trade or profession, and had a relatively high rate of unemployment or an unstable or unrewarding job history. Moreover, employment needs were particularly evident among Aboriginal and among younger women offender populations. However, the majority of women offenders reported that employment was important to them and the majority of women offenders unemployed in the community indicated that they intended to work. Given the degree of employment need and the positive intentions demonstrated by women offenders, the information and suggestions provided by women and staff in the present study were utilized to develop recommendations for future directions in the domain of employment programming for women. Based on the results reported in the present study, there were three different issues or areas that appeared to be particularly relevant for employment programming: women's institutions, the community, and linkages or communication between different services areas or service providers.
Institutional Employment
Women offenders should have the ability to explore and develop career plans and have access to meaningful employment opportunities and training. The ability to engage in career exploration and meaningful employment and training would also incorporate several of the principles of “Creating Choices” put forth by the Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women (1990), including: “meaningful and responsible choices” (women are able to make informed decisions based on comprehensive and accurate information related to their career choices); “empowerment” (women will be given the opportunity to identify their strengths and interests and to control and direct their career paths and, to some extent, their training or employment opportunities), and “shared responsibility”(women may choose their career paths by exploring their interests, job requirements, etc. with staff, and staff would assist them to attain their career goals by helping them to gain access to appropriate training or resources to further these goals).
Career Interests
Given that approximately half of women offenders were either lacking in a trade or profession, or reported dissatisfaction with their profession, women should have the opportunity to explore their career interests and choices with a qualified staff member (e.g., employment counsellor). This exploration should go beyond a simple assessment of offenders' interests, to explore other aspects of the offenders' chosen careers, such as their existing abilities in the area, training or qualifications necessary for the job (e.g., education, certifications), demand for their career interests in the local job market, expected pay levels, and likely requirements for criminal background checks within their chosen profession. Exploration of these factors would allow women to make an informed career decision by enabling them to consider and weigh their interests, abilities, willingness to engage in various degrees of training, or their desire for a certain lifestyle (i.e., salary level).
At the time of the writing of this report, most of the women's institutions were using some tools (e.g., COPS and CAPS) to assess women's occupational interests and abilities. It is imperative that these tools be used, not only to determine women's career interests, but also that the results of these assessments continue to have relevance for institutional employment programming. Results of assessment tools need to be used to direct employment programming and opportunities for women offenders, both on an individual basis (to determine work placements and training, educational upgrading required for the occupation for each woman) and on an institutional level (to determine most useful programs to implement based on the needs and interests of the institutional population). Thus, consideration of career interests should begin as early in the process as possible (particularly for with employment needs and short sentences), and then the focus should move toward providing access to training, education, or employment placements that are likely to further women's career interests.
Employment Training and Opportunities
Both staff and offenders indicated that they perceived employment and employment programming for women offenders to be important and that access to more or different types of training and employment should be provided. Based on women offenders' reported career interests, training and work opportunities related to sales and services, business, finance, and administration, or trades, transport, and equipment operators might serve the employment needs and career interests of the greatest number of women. It is also important to note that while women reported past experience in sales and service, as well as business, finance, and administrative occupations, only a small percentage of women indicated that they had prior experience in the trades (with respect to their most recent job prior to incarceration). Thus, it is possible that the greatest degree of training and experience might be required by those interested in trade-related occupations. Training may need to be provided at the most basic level for women interested in this type of work, gradually progressing to provide women with more advanced certifications, training, and skills over time.
With respect to other occupational interests (e.g., sales and service, business, finance, and administration), women may already have a basic level of training or experience, and simply require higher level training that might enable them to acquire better positions and salaries within their chosen occupation. Alternatively, simply assisting women to obtain links to jobs and employers in the community willing to hire women with criminal records may be sufficient for some of the women interested in these occupational areas (sales and service, business, finance, and administration) who already possess a degree of relevant training and experience. Other areas of moderate interest included social science, education, government service, religion, and art, culture, recreation and sport. Thus, these two occupational areas might also provide future areas for further training or employment for women offenders.
Women offender questionnaire respondents reported a moderate to high degree of self-efficacy for performing employment-related tasks, indicating that they felt they felt quite confident in their abilities (e.g., work performance, learning ability, organizational competence) as well as their abilities to engage in several job-preparation or job search abilities (e.g., résumé development, interview preparation, job-search techniques). However, there were still some women who did not feel quite as confident in their abilities as others, and a few women did express a desire for instruction in techniques such as résumé development. Also, despite their beliefs regarding their abilities to perform employment-related tasks, when asked about their interests for employment training, a fairly high percentage of women reported an interest in employability skills training.
In addition, a number of institutional staff members also suggested that employment in the institutions was not comparable to work in the community, particularly with respect to work expectations (e.g., level of accountability, responsibility, hours of work, etc.). Thus, institutional staff and work supervisors should attempt to make the institutional work situation more similar (where possible) to that in the community, encouraging work skills such as punctuality, communication skills, ability to work positively with others, and so on. Importantly, CORCAN will soon be implementing an Employability Skills Program for women that will encourage the development of these skills in employment settings. The development of work skills and work ethic should be important in the context of all institutional employment placements, whether they constitute the provision of essential services within the institution or for CORCAN employment initiatives. In summary, an effort should be made to make sure that as many women offenders (or at least those with employment needs) are meaningfully employed within the institution and the work placements are realistic in terms of factors such as the number of hours required to do the job, work requirements and expectations, and so on.
It was also interesting to note some of the issues that women listed as disadvantages related to employment. For example, women reported that the need to work with difficult or unpleasant co-workers or employers as well as the added stress and responsibility were disadvantages associated with working. Therefore, it is possible that additional training related to managing relationships or dealing with stress would be useful for some women.
Although some degree of standardization across institutions or regions in terms of employment programming and training would appear to be useful, different approaches and different opportunities may need to be offered at various institutions depending on factors such as the interests of the incarcerated population, local job market trends, the size of the population, and the age or ethnic diversity of the population. For example, it may be easier to implement larger CORCAN projects within some of the institutions that have a larger offender population. It is possible that some of the smaller women's institutions may choose to build links with local community businesses and groups and focus on setting up a number of work releases in the community instead. Results of the present study indicated that very few women participated in work releases in the community during incarceration. Given that more than one-third of women offenders are considered to be low risk to the public, and more than half have high motivation levels and reintegration potentials at intake to federal institutions, work releases should be utilized to a much greater degree.
In addition, results would seem to indicate that certain populations may be over-represented among those with employment needs, particularly younger women offenders and Aboriginal women offenders. Thus institutions with large populations of these groups may wish to make special efforts to direct their programming to take into account factors that may be relevant to these populations (e.g., employment interests, learning styles, education levels). Moreover, it might be useful to designate additional programming or funding specifically for these populations in order to direct programming and services to areas or populations were it might be needed the most.
Addressing ALL of Women's Needs
In addition, the types of employment opportunities or training offered to women may depend upon their employment needs, their needs in other domains, and the length of their sentences. The existence of needs in multiple domains may provide a challenge to addressing the employment needs of women offenders as well. In particular, a large percentage of women offenders also had needs in the personal/emotional and substance abuse domains, the latter of which was also moderately associated with employment needs. Thus, substance abuse would appear to be at least one of the high need areas that will need to be addressed along with offenders' needs in the employment domain.
Several staff mentioned the necessity of balancing women's needs as a challenge, and a few also emphasized that funding needed to be added to assist with employment programming, and not taken from already existing programs that were necessary to address women's other needs. Overall, however, when asked to rate the importance of various types of programming, women offenders and staff appeared to perceive employment to be equally, if not more important, relative to other types of institutional programming. Thus, the challenge will be to balance women's employment needs with their needs for other programs and services. While offenders with longer sentences may be able to engage in a range of training and employment placements, the focus for offenders with shorter sentences with high needs in other domains may need to be on short-term training and certification that will provide them with some advantages in the community upon release. The Correctional Service of Canada is already providing certification courses in several areas that would appear to be of interest to women (e.g., First Aid/ CPR, computer/ technical training) but could possibly focus on increasing access to these courses for a higher proportion of women and providing training in other areas (e.g., cabinet/ furniture making, landscaping/ horticulture, welding) as well.
Resources and Staff Support
In order to implement some of the proposed programs and services, it is likely that additional resources (financial and staff) would be required. A number of institutional staff members suggested that they did not have enough staff to implement or appropriately supervise employment training or placements for women. Thus, it may be necessary to provide some additional funding to hire more staff to handle some of these tasks (e.g., career counselling, implementing and delivering certification programs, setting up employment placements in new occupational areas of interest to the institutional population, including work releases and developing relationships with community agencies or employers). As such, it would seem prudent to designate at least one staff member, primarily or exclusively, to setting up or conducting the majority of these tasks. This person could also act as a primary contact person for employment initiatives within the institution with other individuals or organizations (e.g., CORCAN, CEC staff). In addition, several staff mentioned that industrial or vocational employment in a number of areas was simply not possible unless appropriate space within the institutions was made available. Therefore, funding may be needed to build additional vocational space or to purchase equipment, if an institutional level assessment of interests and needs of the specific institutional populations warrant it.
If staff and offenders are to become engaged in employment programming, they need to believe that they have the support of NHQ to be fully motivated to carry out their training and tasks to the best of their abilities. In any case, it was suggested that NHQ will need to provide at least some financial support, particularly at the institutional level, in order to assist with some of the financial burden that offering additional employment training may require (e.g., employment “space” or additional staff).
An additional issue was related to potential negative perceptions of women offenders' employment capabilities. Several years ago, Townsend (1996) reported that correctional staff may describe inmates as "unreliable, lazy, inattentive, and only capable of performing minimal tasks", perhaps simply due to the fact that offenders may perceive prison work to be unnecessary, unchallenging, and unvalued. Townsend's concerns were supported to a minor degree in the present study, in that some comments were made by a few institutional staff reflecting negative views with respect to women's motivation and capabilities. It is difficult to change attitudes and beliefs. Thus, the best method for challenging these beliefs may be to ensure that women have access to meaningful, challenging employment opportunities that enable them to perform to their potential. Giving staff members the opportunity to view women at their best may lead to more positive perceptions and greater staff acceptance and support of employment initiatives in the future. However, it is important to note that the majority of institutional and community staff reported positive support for women in the employment domain.
One additional concern that was raised by some institutional staff members, however, was related to added security issues or concerns raised about the degree of support for employment programming by security staff. Thus, clear communication between programming and security staff in the planning stages of new employment programs or initiatives may improve awareness and understanding of issues important to both groups, highlighting any potential issues early in the process that might be reconciled to the satisfaction of both groups before any substantial problems arise. Depending on the resources available, the inclusion of extra security staff when necessary for certain employment programs or training programs might also be a solution.
Community
Training and Experience
Overall, the goal should be to prepare women offenders as much as possible for employment in the community while they are incarcerated . As discussed previously, this should include career exploration, access to work experience in areas that are of interest to women, as well as instruction in job preparation and job search skills for those who require or request it. In particular, sufficient training and experience should be provided to women while they are incarcerated to enable them to obtain a job in the community upon release. In reality, of course, this may not always be possible, particularly for women with short sentences and very high needs. As such, some women may still require further training in the community in order to improve their chances of obtaining meaningful employment. Given the small numbers of women offenders and their diverse locations around the country while on release, it would likely prove difficult to set up training programs specifically for federal women offenders in the community, although this may be possible in some areas with larger populations of women offenders. However, the most realistic goal for any women who require further training in the community may be to connect them with existing programs in the community for which they may be eligible. In fact, it may be useful to solicit information from service providers in the community (e.g., CEC staff, parole officers) who appear to be relatively knowledgeable with regards to employment services in the community, and to create a list of all available employment programs in each region that could be updated at regular intervals. Final lists could them be redistributed to service providers in the institution and community who have frequent contact with offenders, ensuring that offenders and staff would have the best access to the most recent information possible regarding employment services for women in the community. In communities where appropriate programs are not available, another possible alternative might be to develop partnerships with other organizations to develop and offer programming that may be shared by federal women offenders and other individuals in the community with similar needs (e.g., male offenders, provincial women offenders).
Assisting Women to Obtain Employment
Overall, women offender questionnaire respondents reported moderate to high social support in the form of ties to employed individuals and access to employment related-resources in the community. They also reported at least moderate awareness of employment services in the community, including some awareness of the Community Employment Centres. About half of women in the community reported that they did not feel that they needed to utilize employment services for various reasons (e.g., did not need assistance, did not intend/unable to work). The other half of respondents did express some interest in utilizing employment services in the community, including the Community Employment Centres. At the time of data collection, use of the centres among women offenders was relatively low, although national data collected by CORCAN indicated that some of women had utilized Centre services and a few had obtained employment through the Centres in the 2003-2004 fiscal year.
Given the number of services provided by the Community Employment Centres, as well as the potential link to community employers based on jobs posted in the Centres, CECs appear to be an excellent resource for women. Some potentially useful suggestions were put forth by CEC staff for increasing awareness and use of their Centres among women offenders, related primarily to greater promotion of the Centres among offenders and staff as well as the provision of additional services for women offenders. In fact, several CEC respondents reported that they were already engaged in active promotion of their Centres, and recent changes to the Case Management Bulletin on Employment and Employability (e.g., need to refer women with employment needs or no evidence of employment to the CECs upon release) might help to increase awareness of the Centres. Of note, the most common reason listed by women for using the Centres was to get a job (other reasons included the use of various Centre services) and the most common complaint about the Centres noted by those who had used them was the inability to access employment through the Centre. Thus, CEC staff may wish to evaluate the types of jobs that are offered through their Centres, in light of women's career interests (which, on the whole, staff appeared to be relatively knowledgeable about), to determine whether they may be able to develop links with new employers in the community in areas of interest to women offenders. Since there was some evidence to suggest that younger women and Aboriginal women offenders might have less social support and access to employment-related resources, access to employment services, such as the CECs, may be particularly important for these groups. In addition, it may be prudent to form links with other agencies or groups (e.g., Aboriginal organizations) to provide more specialized services for Aboriginal women in regions where a large number of Aboriginal women offenders are residing.
Greater promotion of the Centres might increase awareness among women offenders and the provision of additional services and more links with employers in occupational areas of interest to women (e.g., sales and services, business) may encourage more women to use the Centres and assist more women in obtaining employment. However, the use of Community Employment Centres may not be possible or desired by all women offenders, for at least two potential reasons. First, there are a relatively limited number of CECs in the community many women living in rural areas may not have access to the centres. Second, although some women specifically expressed an interest in using the CECs due to the fact that employers might already be aware and accepting of their criminal past, a few women also reported a desire to avoid CECs since they wished to dissociate form their criminal pasts or CSC in general. Thus, there are some women who may be unable or unwilling to access CECs themselves. This is where it may be important to develop awareness of and links with other agencies or organizations that might already be providing employment-related services to women. This issue will be discussed in more detail in the next section on developing links and communication.
Other Practical and Criminogenic Needs
Women's Other Needs. In addition to needs related directly to employment, many staff and offenders discussed issues related to other criminogenic or personal needs that had to be addressed as well. Presumably, at least some progress will be made in addressing these needs during incarceration, but many women offenders will also need follow-up support in community (e.g., substance abuse prevention and maintenance, counselling, support-groups). Other issues that were reported as barriers to employment for women were factors more indirectly related to obtaining or maintaining employment, such as the availability of transportation or appropriate clothing for interviews or employment. Potential solutions to these issues include setting up a small fund for women who are experiencing difficulties in this area, or developing partnerships with other agencies or charitable organizations in the community who might provide financial or practical assistance (e.g., transportation to a job interview, provision of appropriate clothing).
Family and Child-Care
Less than half (about 40%) of women offenders reported that their children were living with them or would be living with them upon release. Most of these respondents reported that someone (usually family members) would be available to provide care for their children, and a small percentage reported that other care-givers (e.g., day-care) would be utilized. However, one might question the long-term feasibility of having family members provide care-giving, and it might be necessary for some women to obtain additional sources of child-care over time. It is important to note that the issue of child-care, although considered by a relatively larger percentage of staff members to be a barrier to employment for women, was mentioned relatively infrequently by women offenders as a perceived barrier to employment. However, a larger percentage of women offenders did mention spending less time with their families and children as a disadvantage related to employment. Depending on the degree of their feelings in this regard, some women might even choose not to work in order to spend more time with their families. It might be possible for these women to explore other options with employment counsellors related to the availability of part-time work, so that they might be able to enjoy more time with their families. Thus, it appears that a small minority of women might require reliable child-care and/or financial assistance related to child-care costs. In this context, financial grants or child-care subsidies could be established, or existing sources of funding could be researched, to help women offenders to offset the monetary costs associated with child-care. On the whole, issues related to child-care might be described as a need for some offenders, but issues related to barriers associated with their criminal records or lack of prior experience or training appeared to be larger concerns, at least as reported by questionnaire respondents in the current study.
Communication/Links between Different Areas or Service Providers
Links between the Institution and Community for Offenders
One issue related to links between the institution and the community was that of providing institutional work opportunities that have greater relevance for or similarity to employment opportunities available to women in the community and to provide a more realistic work environment in the institution (hours of work, employer expectations, etc.). This issue has been discussed in some depth already in the context of institutional employment programming and training. However, greater effort should also be made to provide information about various community services and perhaps even potential employers in the community prior to release. Efforts such as these might provide women with greater continuity of services and a smoother transition from the institution to the community. Similar issues related to the development of ties and cooperation between the institution and the community has also been raised in another recent study regarding the employment needs of federal and provincial women offenders in Québec (Frigon, Strimelle, & Renière, 2003).
Several possibilities exist with regards to increasing links for women offenders. For example, greater use of temporary absences would enable women to make contacts with services in the community prior to release. Given that most women pose a low risk to the community, work releases should also be utilized to a much greater degree to enable women to gain experience and links to potential employers upon release. Thus, more staff resources should be dedicated to assisting women in these areas. The Community Employment Centres might be particularly relevant with regards to developing links between the institution and community. For example, CEC staff could visit women's institutions to generate awareness about their services, and perhaps also develop contacts with offenders requiring employment services and assistance prior to release, so that offenders would be better prepared and be more comfortable accessing the Centres given the prior relationship that has been developed. Given some time to discuss offenders' needs and interests, it might even be possible to set up some potential employment contacts just prior to being released into the community, to enable offenders to establish links with employers immediately upon release.
The issue of policy in effectively directing operational practices is particularly relevant in this area. In fact, several staff members noted the importance of policy, and a few mentioned several areas in which policy or current practice needed to be emphasized or adhered to. For example, it is essential that employment needs and plans be discussed with offenders and incorporated into the correctional plan. In addition, two of the three questionnaire respondents who reported that they had participated in a work release, suggested that they would have liked their work releases to last longer than 60 days. Although the current policy does not state that a work release cannot be for a duration of longer than 60 days, the procedure for granted work releases of a longer duration becomes more complicated (requiring approval of the Regional Deputy Commissioner rather than the Institutional Head). Thus, a review of the policies related to work releases (including time frames) may be beneficial to determine whether changes may be possible or necessary to increase women's access to these types of opportunities.
Links and Communication for Staff
As previously noted, it may be important to develop more links with other organizations or agencies in the community willing to help deliver employment services to women. This might be necessary in a variety of situations or for a variety of reasons, such as an inability to operate CECs in every community, the need for developing specialized services to Aboriginal offenders, or the potential advantages to including advocates for women offenders (e.g., Elizabeth Fry Society) who already have a wealth of knowledge and resources established related to service delivery for women offenders. In addition to developing partnerships with these organizations, it might be worthwhile to attempt to develop a resource list of existing agencies and programs delivering employment-related programming available to women offenders. Such a resource list could be managed either nationally or regionally, updated on a yearly basis and then distributed to service providers in the institutions and community so that women could obtain information about any services that might be available to them in their releasing region from a variety of different sources.
Thus, links and communication are paramount to developing and implementing services for this relatively small and diverse population of women who are geographically dispersed across the country. Cooperation and communication are important; not only with other organizations, but also among CSC staff themselves, including communication between various departments, institutions, and regions. This is an area in which CORCAN regional staff members, such as the Employment Coordinators interviewed in the present study could play a potentially influential role. Currently, Employment Coordinators reported a fair degree of communication within their own regions, although one respondent did raise some concerns regarding the level of communication with parole officers. However, these staff members reported little communication across regions in terms of employment programs or initiatives. It is important to note, however, that the positions of the Employment Coordinators were not officially established at the time that this study was conducted. At the time of the writing of this report (April, 2005), CORCAN was in the process of establishing official positions (to be called “Managers, Employment and Employability”) with official job descriptions. Thus, one of the tasks of the individuals performing these jobs might be to foster greater communication across regions, particularly with respect to women's employment needs and programming, given the relative isolation of the institutions from one another.
Furthermore, there are several staff members (e.g., Employment Coordinators, CEC staff) capable of creating links and fostering communication within the community or with other staff or other community agencies. However, there would appear to be fewer staff members dedicated specifically to employment programming and tasks within the institutions. The quote of one of the staff respondents bears repeating here.
I think a lot of it boils - My own personal opinion is, I think part of it is the organizational structure of [Institutional Name Deleted]. It doesn't mimic the male institutions, so there tend to be, you know from an employment point of view, we're talking to the [Job Title Deleted], we're talking to the [Job Title Deleted}, we talking to the [Job Title Deleted], we're talking to 6 different people that often don't communicate amongst themselves or don't accept responsibility, or it just seems to be not a good fit and often, very often, things just fall right off the rails. And I think that because of that sort of funny organizational structure, you've got people with very fragmented responsibilities. And so, it's not that they're busy…they're usually extremely busy, but they're doing sort of diverse things that typically in another set-up would have been more streamlined.
Thus, it seems that the designation of at least one person whose primary or sole responsibility is the development of employment programming and opportunities for women offenders would be important. In addition to working to develop training and programs and links to employers for offenders, this individual could also serve as a contact person for staff in other areas (CECs, CORCAN staff, community organizations). In addition, greater communication and sharing of information could be fostered across institutions and regions through designated employment staff in each of the institutions by encouraging regular communication between these individuals (e.g., newsletters describing employment initiatives, conference calls several times a year). Although some standardization of training programs and program delivery might be beneficial, it also seems likely that given different institutional populations with potentially different needs and challenges (e.g., different ethnic populations, smaller versus larger populations) and potentially different labour market needs and demands across different regions, some degree of flexibility and creativity in institutional employment programming will be necessary. However, communication between regions (by institutional employment staff, or employment coordinators) could foster the development of enthusiasm and creativity based on the sharing of information, ideas, and challenges related to employment programming for women offenders among employment staff who might otherwise be relatively isolated from one another due to geographic distance.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
The strengths of the present study lie in the wealth of qualitative and quantitative data that were collected from a variety of sources, using multiple methodologies (file reviews, questionnaires, interviews). However, there are a few caveats that should also be discussed. First of all, results based on questionnaire or interview data have provided a great deal of information regarding numerous factors ranging from an evaluation of women's past history and employment needs to assessments of current employment programs and services, to employment-related attitudes, interests, self-efficacy, and social support. However, it should be noted that the sample for this study was selected based only on those who were interested in participating in the study. Thus, it is possible some results may have differed somewhat from the history, beliefs, and attitudes of the entire population of women and staff.
Arguably, the information that might differ the most between the study sample and the population might be those related to beliefs and particularly, attitudes. For example, women offenders and staff who responded to the study might have been those who were the most interested in employment and who perceived it to be relatively important. In fact, some staff and offenders did seem to think that they believed employment programming to more important than did other staff or offenders. It is possible that these findings might be related to a social desirability bias (i.e., the desire to present oneself in a positive light), but it is also possible that those who responded to the study simply were the individuals who were most interested in employment programming and who did in fact perceive employment programming to be quite important as compared to the rest of the population. Similarly, the degree of interest in employment and self-reported intentions to work as reported by offenders may have been inflated somewhat in the present study as it would seem likely that those who were most interested in employment were the ones who responded to the study. On the other hand, it might be argued that issues related to problems with the current state of employment programming and the suggestions for the future or employment programming might have been least affected by sampling issues, since if those who responded to the study were the most interested and involved with employment and employment programming, it could be argued that these individuals might be best situated to present detailed and valid information on these subjects. Thus, the results of the present study should be interpreted with these factors (related to sampling issues) in mind. Nevertheless, the response to this study, and the degree of interest and importance attached to employment by respondents, does indicate that a large number of women and staff are interested in and dedicated to employment and employment programming.
In the present study, attempts were also made to identify any populations that might have heightened needs in the employment domain. Overall, employment needs were more prevalent among younger women and Aboriginal women. In addition, these groups of women were more likely to report that substance abuse had interfered with employment in the past and there was some indication that they might have access to fewer resources or social support for employment. Moreover, greater percentages of younger women offenders perceived little value in employment. Thus, the authors have suggested that greater programming or resources may be needed for these groups in the employment domain. However, it might be useful to investigate the needs of younger women and Aboriginal women offenders further in order to better design and direct employment services for these individuals (e.g., types of occupational interests, learning preferences, etc.). In addition, a few staff members suggested that there were several additional challenges to providing employment services to maximum security women. Unfortunately, the data obtained from this study were not sufficient to determine the exact nature of the need and issues faced by these women or the potential solutions. Therefore, further investigation of the problems associated with the development or delivery of employment programming for maximum security women might be warranted for the future.
In addition, the results of the present study have provided a general overview of the employment history and interests of women offenders. However, the results of the present study were based on the career interests and past history of a small number of women ( n = 58). Moreover, offender self-reported institutional interests for training and employment were based on lists generated primarily from training or employment that had been offered (to men or women) or could potentially be offered in an institutional setting in the future. However, these lists were presented simply to generate a number of ideas and were not exhaustive of all types of training or employment that women might be interested in. Therefore, women's reported career interests, which were generated based on an open-ended question enabling women to freely self-report their future interests, may provide the best description of their employment interest. Notwithstanding, the results of this study have provided some ideas regarding institutional employment interests that might be related to women's later career goals. Given the small sample size in the present study, however, we would recommend further investigation of women's occupational interests in order to obtain more detailed information that will be useful in directing future employment programming. Thus, more detailed examination of data collected in the institutions (e.g., COPS and CAPS abilities and interests assessment tools) is recommended. Evaluation of data collected from women offenders with these or other assessment instruments should be used to provide more detailed information to direct individual as well as institutional level employment programming. An institutional examination of women's interests combined with an evaluation of regional labour market trends might provide the best information to direct institutional level employment programming. Given the larger amount of data that might be available from assessment tools utilized within the institution, the interests specific to certain populations (younger women, Aboriginal women) might also be determined.
Finally, it should be mentioned that the development of employment programming is an on-going process, and that not all current changes, programs, or knowledge may have been adequately captured within the present study. For example, the Case Management Bulletin on Employment and Employability from April 1, 2003 simply states that “CORCAN Community Employment Centres are to be utilized where they are available and appropriate to the offender's needs.” However, the most recent Case Management Bulletin related to this topic also states that “At the time of the completion of the Community Strategy, offenders with any employment needs, or with no evidence of employment in the community upon release, must be referred to Community Employment Centres in order to continue with job readiness programs and to receive assistance with job placements in the community.” Given the clear directive to refer women with employment needs to the CECs as part of their release planning, it is possible that the level of awareness regarding the Centres has increased since the time that the data for this study were collected. Thus, the readers should keep in mind the time of data collection (spring and summer of 2004) and that the development of employment programming is continuously evolving for women; thus not all recent changes may have been adequately captured in this document.
REFERENCES
Blanchette, K. (1996). The relationship between criminal history, mental disorder, and recidivism among federally sentenced female offenders. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario.
Blanchette, K., & Dowden, C. (1998). A profile of federally sentenced women in the community: Addressing needs for successful reintegration. Forum on Corrections Research, 10 (1), 40-41.
Blanchette, K., & Motiuk, L. L. (1995). Female offender risk assessment: The case management strategies approach. Poster presented at the annual convention of the Canadian Psychological Association, Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island.
Bonta, J., Pang, B., & Wallace-Capretta, S. (1995). Predictors of recidivism among incarcerated female offenders. The Prison Journal, 75, 277-294.
Brown, S. L., (2002). The dynamic prediction of criminal recidivism: A three-wave prospective study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario.
Cullen, F. T, Lemming, T., Link, B. G., & Wozniak, J. F. (1985). The impact of social supports on police stress. Criminology, 23, 401-421.
Cullen, F. T., Link, B. G., Wolfe, N. T., & Frank, J. (1985). The social dimensions of correctional officer stress. Justice Quarterly, 2, 505-528.
Dowden, C. & Andrews, D. A. (1999). What works for female offenders: A meta-analytic review. Crime and Delinquency, 45, 438-452.
Dowden, C., & Serin, R. (2000). Assessing the needs of Aboriginal women offenders on conditional release. Forum on Corrections Research, 12 (1), 57-60.
Dowden, C., Serin, R., & Blanchette, K. (2001). The application of the Community Intervention Scale to women offenders: Preliminary findings. Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada.
Fletcher, W. L., Hansson, R. O., & Bailey, L. (1992). Assessing occupational self-efficacy among middle-aged and older adults. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 11, 489-501.
Frigon, S., Strimelle V., & Renière, C. (2003). Job Entry and Retention for Women Subject to Judicial Control in Quebec. Advisory Committee on the Adult Clientele Subject to Judicial Control. Québec: Emploi-Quebec.
Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Gray, G. (1999). Case Needs Review: Employment Domain. Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada.
Gillis, C. A. (2002). Understanding employment: A prospective exploration of factors linked to community-based employment among federal offenders. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario.
Maguire, K. (1996). Prison industry programs and inmate institutional behavior. Forum on Corrections Research, 8 (1), 39-42.
Maurer, T. J. (2001). Career-relevant learning and development, worker age, and beliefs about self-efficacy for development. Journal of Management, 27, 123-140.
Motiuk, L. (1996). Targeting employment patterns to reduce offender risk and need. Forum on Corrections Research, 8 (1), 18-22.
Motiuk, L., & Belcourt, R. (1996). CORCAN participation and post-release recidivism. Forum on Corrections Research, 8 (1), 15-17.
Motiuk, L. L., & Blanchette, K. (2000). Assessing female offenders: What works. In M. McMahon (Ed .), Assessment to assistance: Programs for women in community corrections (pp. 235-266). Arlington, VA: American Correctional Association.
Report of the Auditor General (2003, April). Reintegration of Women Offenders , Chapter 4. Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.
Rettinger, J. L. (1998). A recidivism follow-up study investigating risk and need within a sample of provincially sentenced women. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario.
Saipe, A. L., (1971). A survey of private management's attitudes to prison industries in the Canadian Penitentiary Service . Ottawa: Ministry of the Solicitor General.
Saylor, W. G., & Gaes, G. G. (1996). The effect of prison employment and vocational/apprenticeship training on long-term recidivism. Forum on Corrections Research, 8 (1), 12-14.
Shaw, M., Rodgers, K., Blanchette, J., Hattem, T., Thomas, L. S., & Tamarack, L. (1991a) Survey of Federally Sentenced Women: Report to the Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women on the Prison Survey, no. 1991-4. Ottawa: Corrections Branch, Ministry of the Solicitor General.
Shaw, M., Rodgers, K., Blanchette, J., Hattem, T., Thomas, L. S., & Tamarack, L. (1991b) The Release Study: Survey of Federally Sentenced Women in the Community, no. 1991-5. Ottawa: Corrections Branch, Ministry of the Solicitor General.
Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women. (1990). Creating Choices: Report on the Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women. Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada.
Townsend, T. (1996). Offenders and work in the Correctional Service of Canada: A historical evolution. Forum on Corrections Research, 8 (1), 35-38.
Uggen, C. (2000). Work as a turning point in the life course of criminals: A duration model of age, employment, and recidivism. American Sociological Review, 67, 529-546.
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Marital Status of OMS Women Offender Snapshot Population (May 1, 2004) and Questionnaire Sample
OMS Snapshot Data (n = 843) |
Questionnaire Sample (n = 92) |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Marital Status |
n |
% |
n |
% |
Married |
110 |
13% |
6 |
6% |
Common-Law |
190 |
23% |
29 |
32% |
Divorced/Separated |
103 |
12% |
19 |
21% |
Widowed |
37 |
4% |
6 |
6% |
Single or Boyfriend/Girlfriend |
375 |
45% |
31 |
34% |
Not Reported/Unknown |
28 |
3% |
1 |
1% |
Appendix B: Offence Information for OMS Women Offender Population (May 1, 2004) and Questionnaire Sample
|
OMS Snapshot Data (n = 843) |
Questionnaire Sample (n = 92) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Offense |
n |
% |
n |
% |
Homicide/Attempted Murder |
232 |
28% |
23 |
25% |
Drug Related |
229 |
27% |
19 |
21% |
Assault |
107 |
13% |
5 |
5% |
Robbery |
106 |
13% |
20 |
22% |
Property-Related |
88 |
10% |
13 |
14% |
Other Violent or Non-Violent Offences |
81 |
9% |
7 |
8% |
Not-Reported |
----- |
----- |
5 |
5% |
Note : Since many women had more than one conviction, OMS offense data were coded to determine the one most violent offence for which women had been convicted. In order to obtain offense data from questionnaire respondents , women were asked to report their most serious offense (or the offense for which they received the longest sentence).
Appendix C1: Institutional Residency of Women Offender Incarcerated Population (May 1 st , 2004) and Questionnaire Sample at the Time of Data Collection
|
Institutional Data Snapshot (n = 384) |
Institutional Sample b (n = 58) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Institution |
n |
% |
N |
% |
Fraser Valley Institution for Women |
30 a |
(8%) |
6 |
(11%) |
Edmonton Institution for Women |
80 |
(21%) |
15 |
(26%) |
Okimaw Ohci Healing Lodge |
18 |
(5%) |
7 |
(12%) |
Grand Valley Institution for Women |
87 |
(23%) |
13 |
(22%) |
Joliette Institution for Women |
66 |
(17%) |
4 |
(7%) |
Nova Institution for Women |
60 |
(15%) |
13 |
(22%) |
Other |
43 |
(11%) |
---- |
------- |
a) Data regarding the population at Fraser Valley institution was obtained from an alternate data source; the Corporate Reporting System. From this system, data were obtained based on the population totals at FVI for the last week of April, 2004.
b) Questionnaires were distributed and collected between February and July of 2004.
Appendix C2: Releasing Region for Women Offender Community Population (May 1 st , 2004) and Community Sample Residency at the Time of Data Collection
|
Community Data Snapshot (n = 459) |
Community Sample b (n = 34) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Region |
n |
% |
n |
% |
Pacific |
53 |
(12%) |
0 |
(0%) |
Prairies |
113 |
(25%) |
10 |
(29%) |
Ontario |
189 |
(41%) |
9 |
(26%) |
Quebec |
80 |
(17%) |
6 |
(18%) |
Atlantic |
24 |
(5%) |
3 |
(9%) |
Unknown |
---- |
---- |
6 |
(18%) |
Questionnaires were distributed and collected between February and July of 2004.
|
n |
Years Working in Current Position |
Years Working with Offenders a |
Years Working with Women Offenders b |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Institutional Staff (Questionnaire Sample) |
51 |
2.6 (2.7) |
7.7 (6.0) |
4.3 (4.3) |
Institutional Staff (Interview Sample) |
18 |
2.6 (3.2) |
9.8 (6.9) |
4.6 (4.4) |
Community Parole Officers |
11 |
8.3 (7.0) |
12.5 (6.9) |
8.3 (4.0) |
CORCAN Regional/National Staff |
5 |
3.1 (0.9) |
18 (4.9) |
_____ |
Community Employment Centre (CEC) Staff |
14 |
4.4 (5.4) |
5.1 (4.9) |
_____ |
Note : The number of participants differed slightly for some of the questions since in a minority of cases a few staff members chose not to respond to one or more of the questions above.
a) The wording of this question differed slightly for CEC staff who were asked about the number of years they had worked in the area of employment counselling with offenders. All other staff members were questioned about the number of years they had been working in the field of corrections.
b) Although CEC staff members were not asked about the number of years they had been working with women offenders, 11/14 reported that they had previously worked with women offenders at their centre.
Appendix E: Number of Institutional Staff (Questionnaire and Interview Respondents) by Institution.
Institution |
Institutional Staff Questionnaires (n = 51) |
Institutional Staff Telephone Interviews (n = 18) |
|---|---|---|
Fraser Valley |
16 |
4 |
Edmonton Institution for Women |
7 |
4 |
Okimaw Ohci Healing Lodge |
3 |
0 |
Grand Valley Institution for Women |
9 |
4 |
Isabel McNeil House |
2 |
1 |
Joliette Institution |
10 |
3 |
Nova Institution |
4 |
2 |
Appendix F: Offender Questionnaire – Institutional Version
Purpose, Objectives, and Requirements
The objective of this study is to find out more about your experiences and beliefs regarding employment. Correctional Service of Canada is currently working to improve employment services for women offenders, to help women to gain the skills they will need to obtain meaningful employment upon release. In order to make sure that we are meeting the needs of women offenders, it is very important that we receive input from you regarding your perceptions of your needs and employment interests. In order to help us to better design employment programming for women, you will be asked to respond to questions that deal with the following subjects:
- a brief description of your background information (e.g., offence history, marital status, child-rearing responsibilities)
- your employment history (any past employment or training)
- your experiences with institutional employment or training
- your employment interests, beliefs, and perceived supports
- your suggestions for employment programs for women offenders
Your participation will involve completing a package of questionnaires. The package will take, at most, one hour to complete.
Right to Participate and Withdraw
It is important to understand that you are under no obligation to partake in this study. You have the right to withdraw at anytime. There will be no penalty if you decide to decline participation, or withdraw at any stage of the research.
Confidentiality
Strict confidentiality will be given for all of your responses. Each completed questionnaire will be seen only by the research team conducting the study. Individual information gathered from the study will not be released to any other CSC employee.
Informed Consent
My signature below indicates that I have read the above description of the study, and understand fully its requirements and purpose. I also understand my rights regarding confidentiality, voluntary participation, and withdrawal. I hereby give my consent to participate in the research project.
Name (Print): _________________________________
Signature: ____________________________________
Date: ____________________________
Note: Once you have signed this consent form, you may simply enclose it in the envelope provided with the questionnaire, or you may tear off this consent form and return it separately to the researcher at your institution.
PLEASE NOTE : ONCE YOU HAVE COMPLETED THIS QUESTIONNAIRE, PLEASE ENCLOSE IT IN THE ENVELOPE PROVIDED AND SEAL IT. THEN GIVE IT TO A STAFF MEMBER TO BE MAILED TO THE RESEARCHERS AT NHQ.
General Employment Information: Institution
- Today's Date __________________
- Age ___________
- Ethnicity (circle one)
- White
- Aboriginal
- Black
- Asian
- Other (specify) ______________
- Marital Status (circle one)
- Married
- Common Law (in a relationship more than 6 months)
- Divorced/Separated
- Widowed
- Girlfriend/boyfriend
- Single/Never Married
- Do you have any children? (circle one) Yes No
- (If you do not have children , please skip directly to question #7 on the next page)
- If yes ,
- How many children do you have? ____________
- What are their ages? _______________________
- Prior to your incarceration, were you caring full-time for your children at home? (circle one) Yes No
- Upon your release to the community, once you are able to make your own living arrangements, how many of your children do you expect will be living with you? (please circle one response)
- all of them
- some of them (how many and what ages?) __________________________
- none of them
- If you expect that any of your children will be living with you after your release:
- is there anyone who could care for them if you decided to work? (circle one) Yes No
- if yes, list who could care for them _______________________________
- Upon your release, who do you expect that you will be living with? (circle one)
- Husband/wife, common-law partner, boyfriend/girlfriend
- Family of Origin (parents) or other family
- Friends
- Alone
- Strangers (e.g., hostel, half-way house)
- Moving around, changing
- Don't know, not arranged yet
- Current Institution (circle one)
- Fraser Valley Institution
- Edmonton Institution for Women
- Okimaw Ohci Healing Lodge
- Grand Valley Institution for Women
- Joliette Institution
- Nova Institution
- Current Offence (if more than one, report offence with longest sentence)
- Total Sentence Length _______________________________________
- What date did your sentence commence? _______________________
- Approximately how many years have you already served on your current sentence? ____
- Is this your first Federal Sentence? (circle one) Yes No
- In general, what factors do you feel have contributed to your involvement in criminal behavior?
- What factors would help keep you out of trouble with the law in the future?
- What is the highest level of education you achieved while in school in the community? (highest grade level completed) ______________________________
- a) Have you done any upgrading since then? (circle one) Yes No
- Prior to your incarceration, what was your main source of income. (please circle one)
- Employment
- Employment Insurance (Unemployment Insurance) or Disability
- Welfare/Social Assistance
- Mother's Allowance
- Spouse/Family
- Friends
- Illegal Activities
- Other (describe) _______________________________________
- i) Prior to your incarceration, did you ever engage in any other activities in order to make money? (circle any that apply)
- Exotic Dancing ( legal employment )
- Working "under the table" at any other job other than that already listed in options (a), (c), (d)…. ( e.g., getting paid in cash for working but not claiming it on your income tax return ). Describe the job _______________________
- Drug Trade
- Prostitution
- Other (describe) _______________________________________
- a) What hourly rate of pay do you think that you would have to make while working in order to meet your basic needs? ______________________________________________________
b) Are you qualified for any jobs that would allow you to make that hourly wage?(circle one)
c) Yes Noc. If yes , please list the jobs below.______________________________________
- a) Did you ever have any work experience outside the home prior to your incarceration? (circle one) Yes No
- a) Prior to your incarceration, had you previously taken any employment training courses? (circle one) Yes No
- a) Do you have any other skills that you think would help you to find a job?
- a) Have you experienced any difficulties or had any problems when looking for work in the past? (circle one) Yes No
________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
b) If yes, what is the Highest Grade Level you have completed up to now? _____
ii) If you engaged in any of the above activities, why did you? _____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
If Yes,
b) What was your occupation? (most recent job prior to incarceration)
____________________________________________________
c) What was your approximate hourly salary ? (most recent job prior to incarceration)
____________________________________________________
d). Was this salary sufficient to meet your basic needs? (circle one) Yes No
Explain…_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
e) List any experience in any other types of employment in the community.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
b) If yes , please describe….
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
(circle one)Yes No
b) If yes , please list them below….
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
b) If yes , what were the difficulties/problems you experienced?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
c) Is there anything that you think could help you to deal with these problems.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Institutional Training/Jobs
- a) Have you taken any vocational or training courses during your incarceration ? (circle one) Yes No
b) If yes , please list the courses below?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- a) Are you currently working in the institution? (circle one) Yes No
b) If yes, please answer question #3 , if no , please skip directly to question #4 on the next page.
- What is your current job (list all jobs if you currently have more than one)…
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
ii) What is your current pay level? (circle one)
- Level A
- Level B
- Level C
- Level D
- Other (explain) _______________________
iii) How satisfied are you with your current job(s)? (circle one)
- Very Unsatisfied
- Somewhat Unsatisfied
- Neither Unsatisfied or Satisfied
- Somewhat Satisfied
- Very Satisfied
iv) Would you be interested in performing this type of work upon release in the community? (circle one) Yes No
v) Please indicate why you took this job(s)? You may select more than one option if you like. ( circle any that apply ).
- you were interested in this type of work
- you didn't have anything else to do
- employment training was recommended as part of your correctional plan
- correctional staff suggested that you take this job
- so that you could make some money
- other (describe) ____________________
Only answer question #4 if you are currently unemployed…
- If you are unemployed at present (not working in the institution), what is the reason? (circle one)
- Newly Arrived – Haven't obtained a job yet.
- Currently Taking other Programs (e.g., Education)
- Unable to Work (Disability, Health)
- Not Interested in Working
- No Jobs are Currently Available to me (explain) __________________________
- Other (describe) ___________________________________
- Included on this page is a list of Vocational or Training Courses that some individuals may be interested in taking . Please check any courses that you would be interested in taking if you had the opportunity.
- _____ Vocational Assessment at Intake (to determine employment interests and abilities)
- _____ Basics in Food Safety --Sanitation Training
- _____ Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS)
- _____ Safe Start -- Pre-Employment Certification (advanced course on safety in the workplace)
- _____ Employability Skills or Socio-Occupational Integration Services (develop employability skills, attitudes, behaviours to enhance readiness to work)
- _____ First Aid & CPR
- _____ Industrial Cleaning Program
- _____ Building Service Worker/Superintendent
- _____ Cooking or Cook's Helper
- _____ Butcher's Helper
- _____ Landscaping/Horticulture
- _____ Automobile Service Clerk
- _____ Automotive Painter-Bodywork
- _____ Maintenance Mechanic's Helper
- _____ Metalworking Machine Operator or Metal Painter-Coater
- _____ Machine Shop
- _____ Welding or Welder's Helper Program
- _____ Forklift Operator
- _____ Sports Equipment Installation and Repair
- _____ Electronics
- _____ Gas Engines
- _____ Plumbing
- _____ Vocational Carpentry
- _____ Construction Safety Computer Based Training or Chainsaw Safety
- _____ Woodworker, Cabinetmaker, or Furniture Maker
- _____ Upholsterer's Helper
- _____ Industrial Products Assembler
- _____ Bricklayer-Mason
- _____ Clerk (Inventory or Shipping and Receiving)
- _____ Library Clerk
- _____ Computer Skills/Technological Studies
- _____ Accounting
- _____ Industrial Design
- _____ Printing
- _____Dental Assistant
- _____ Laundry and Dry-Cleaning Helper
- _____ Hairdressing/Esthetics
- _____ Textile/Tailor's Worker
- _____ Industrial Sewing Machine Operator or Mechanic's Helper
- Are there any other vocational or training courses that you would like to take that are not listed above ?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- Jobs: If any of the following jobs were available, would you be interested in working at any of these types of jobs while incarcerated? Your interests may include jobs that you: currently have, you have worked at in the past, or you have never worked at. Check any jobs that you would be interested in ( you may check more than one ).
- _____Abattoir (meat processing plant)
- _____Administration (office environment, computers/filing, etc.)
- _____Baker
- _____Beverage Person (food service industry)
- _____Butcher
- _____Cabinetmaker or Furniture Assembler
- _____Canteen Operator (involves selling as well as bookkeeping/paperwork)
- _____Care Giver (assist person with a disability)
- _____Cleaner (general cleaning duties)
- _____Construction Worker
- _____Cook/Food Prep Worker
- _____Dishwasher
- _____Editor of a Publication (participate in editing and publishing of newspaper)
- _____Elders assistant and Groundskeeper (maintain and participate in operation of Elder's Lodge)
- _____Farm Hand or Dairy Worker (agriculture and livestock)
- _____Furnace Maintenance
- _____Graphic Designer (computer aided design and layout)
- _____Greenhouse-Horticulture
- _____Groundskeeper
- _____Hairdressing/Esthetics
- _____Inmate Committee (facilitate inmate participation in approved events, maintain communication between inmate population and administration, etc.)
- _____Laundry
- _____Library Assistant
- _____Manufacturing (general - cut and process materials, use power tools, etc.)
- _____Metal Worker (fabrication, assembly, installation, and repair of sheet metal products and equipment)
- _____Painter
- _____Peer Counsellor
- _____Plumber or Plumber's Assistant
- _____Printing Services (maintenance and operation of printing press)
- _____Recycling (identify, sort, and dispose of recyclable materials)
- _____Tailor/Textile Worker (use and operation of textile and tailoring equipment - e.g., sewing machine)
- _____Upholsterer (use of tools, techniques, and skills for furniture upholstery)
- Are there any jobs ( that we have not included in the previous list ) that you would like to work at while incarcerated? If so, please list them here.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Work Release
Work releases may be available to eligible offenders. A work release is a structured release of a specified duration for work or community service outside the institution.
- Have you participated in a work release during your current sentence?
-
- What type of job did you have on your work release? ____________________________
- Approximately how many months was the work release? __________________________
- What things did you like best about your work release?
- Was there anything that you did not enjoy, or anything that you would have liked to do differently on your work release (e.g., different job, longer/shorter time, etc) Please explain.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- (Please answer this question whether or not you have ever participated in a work release.)
(circle one) Yes No
(If yes , please answer question #2, if no , please skip directly to question #3 below…)
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- Given the opportunity, would you like to participate in a work release in the future? (circle one) yes no
- If yes, what type of work would you like to do on a work release?
___________________________________________________
Upon Release…
- Do you intend to find a job upon release from the institution? (circle one)
- No
- Maybe
- Yes
- How would you rate your chances of finding a job within 6 months of your release?
- Poor
- OK
- Good
- How important is it for you to have a job?
- Not Very
- Somewhat
- Important
- If you do not intend to seek a job upon release, why not?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- How would you rate your ability to…
| Very Poor | Poor | Average | Good | Very Good | |
a) create a good resymer |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
b) perform well during a job interview |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
c) know where to look for a job |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
- a) Are you aware of any employment services in the community? (circle one) yes no
b) If yes , please list them below.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
____________________________ ____________________________
- Do you have any suggestions for improving employment services to women in the institution or to help women prepare for employment in the community upon release?
- If you are interested in finding a job upon release , what types of job or what type of career would you like to have ? (list as many as you want)
- Would you also be interested in working in any of the areas listed below?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
(check any that you are interested in)
(Note: If you are not interested in working, please skip to the next page.)
- _____ Administrative Support (e.g., clerical support positions in an office environment)
- _____ Agribusiness (e.g., farming)
- _____ Arts and Entertainment (e.g., management, clerical or sales within theatres, stadiums, and galleries)
- _____ Automotive Industry (e.g., mould-makers, tool, and die makers, CNC machine operators and auto assemblers)
- _____ Call centers (e.g., telemarketing)
- _____ Construction (e.g., trade workers such as carpenters, plumbers, and welders, transport and equipment operations)
- _____ Dental or Health Related Employment
- _____ Estheticians, Hairdressing, and Related Occupations
- _____ Fashion Industry (includes manufacturing, retail, modeling, and makeup artistry)
- _____ Fishing
- _____ Food and Beverage Services (includes all food and beverage handlers, restaurants, kitchen workers)
- _____ Forestry
- _____ Horticulture (includes landscaping)
- _____ Janitorial Services (includes any type of cleaning service)
- _____ Labourers (construction, etc.)
- _____ Manufacturing/Fabrication
- _____ Meat Cutting
- _____ Mining
- _____ Oil and Gas Industry
- _____ Retail
- _____ Temp Agencies (e.g., Labour-Ready)
- _____ Tourism (includes accommodation, food and beverage, adventure tourism and recreation, travel trade, attractions, transportation, events & conferences)
- _____ Trucking (includes tractor-trailer driver, moving van driver, dump truck driver, flatbed driver, and bulk goods truck driver)
- _____ Warehousing (includes shippers, receivers, forklift operators and delivery services)
- a) Do you have any training/experience in the types of jobs you are interested in?
(circle one) Yes No
b) Explain…
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
In general, how important do you think the following programs/services are for you ?
Very Unimportant |
somewhat Unimportant | Average Importance | Somewhat Important | Very Important | |
| 1. Aboriginal Programs (e.g.,Cicles of Change, Spirit of a Warrior | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 2. Elder Counseling | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 3. Education Program (e.g., Adult Basic Education) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 4. Employment Programs (e.g., Employability Skills; Vocational Training) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 5. Counselling Services (e.g., Psychologist) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 6. Survivors of Abuse & Trauma | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 7. Intensive Intervention Services (e.g., Dialectical Behaviour Therapy) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 8. Living Skills Programs (e.g., Reasoning & Rehabilitation; Anger & Emotions Management) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 9. Parenting Skills | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 10. Substance Abuse Programming | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 11. Chaplaincy Services | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Using the same scale above….
…How important do you think employment
opportunities/training/programs are perceived
to be by….
12. Staff at your institution? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
13. By CSC National Headquarters? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Instructions: For the following items, indicate how you would compare yourself to the average worker your own age, using the rating scale provided. If you are not working right now, imagine how you think you would compare to other workers.
1. Worse than most workers |
3. Same as most workers |
5. Better than most workers |
| 1. Dependability | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 2.Pride in a jeb well done | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 3. Contribution to the company | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 4. Efforts to continually learn more about my job | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 5. Interest in further career growth | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 6. Judgment | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 7. Ability to deal with people | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 8. Co-workers can trust me | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 9. Ability to help co-workers with job-related problems | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 10. Energy level (endurance) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 11. Perseverance on difficult jobs | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 12. Ability to remember job details | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 13. Ability to be retrained for new jobs | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 14. Ability to handle complex jobs | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 15. Ability to adapt to changes in work group | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 16. Ability to communicate clearly on the job | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 17. Ability to support co-workers with personal problems | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 18. Ability to get along with "difficult" co-workers | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 19. Relevant experience | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 20. Ability to control quality of my work | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 21. Job safety habits/record | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 22. Ability to meet my work goals | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 23. Current skills | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 24. Ability to plan effectively | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 25. Knowledge of the latest technologies | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 26. Ability to learn from experienced workers | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 27. Ability to teach/mange others | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 28. Knowing where to to in company for most kinds of help | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 29. Knowing how to get cooperation from other departments, co-workers | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Instructions: Please indicate the response that best described your situation prior to incarceration (based on the place that you lived and the people you knew there).
1. None |
2. Few |
3. Several |
4. Most |
| 1. Think of your best friends: that is, those close friends who you saw most frequently prior to your incaceration. |
| a) Did any of them have full-time jobs? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| b) Were any of them the type of people who enjoyed working for a living? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 2. Think of the people you knew and associated with prior to your incarceration.... |
| a) Did any of them have full-time jobs? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| b) Were any of them the type of people who enjoyed working for a living? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
1. No |
2. Not Sure |
3. Yes |
4. Definitely Yes |
| 3. If I wanted to find a job, I'd have known where to go or who to see. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 4. If I wnated to get some information about work, I'd have known where to to, or who to see. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 5. If I was planning to fins a job, I would have known some people who could and would help me to find one... | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 6. While I might not have called them friends and I might not have seen them very often, I knew some people who had full-time jobs... | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 7. I knew of at least one person in my neighbourhood or area of town who appeared to be doing "just fine" as a result of his/her employment . | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 8. In my neighbourhood or area of town, there were people who had jobs and were liked and respected by others in the neighbourhood. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 9. In my neighbourhood or area of town, there were people who had jobs and they were diliked and not respected by others in the neighbourhood. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
Instructions: Please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with each of these statements. When responding to these items, please think about the people that you consider to be family.
When answering the following questions, please think back to your last job, and answer these questions in response to that job.
Note: If you have never been employed, then do not complete this scale.
1. Very Strongly Disagree |
2. Strongly Disagree |
3. Slightly Disagree |
4. Undecided |
5. Slightly Agree |
6. Strongly Agree |
7.Very Strongly Agree |
| 1. I had people in may family that I could talk to about the problems I had at work. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 2. No one in my family could really understand how tough my job was. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 3. When my job got me down, I always knew that I could turn to my family and get the support I needed to feel better. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 4. There was really no one in my family that I could talk to about my job. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 5. My family couldn't really help me much when my job got me tense. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 6. It's a good thing that I had my family around when things weren't going well at work. They could really understand me and made me feel better. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
Advantages/Disadvantages of Employment
Advantages
I'd like you to imagine having a steady job (in the community). People say that certain good things can go along with this (e.g., nice house, good money). What are some good things you associate with having a steady job? List as many as you can think of:
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Disadvantages
Again, imagine having a steady job (in the community). People say that some bad things can go along with having a steady job (e.g., no free time, working for someone else). What are some bad things you associate with having a steady job? List as many as you can think of:
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
END OF QUESTIONNAIRE:
Please put in envelope provided, seal, and give to a staff member for mailing.
Appendix G: Offender Questionnaire – Community Version
Purpose, Objectives, and Requirements
The objective of this study is to find out more about your experiences and beliefs regarding employment. Correctional Service of Canada is currently working to improve employment services for women offenders, to help women to gain the skills they will need to obtain meaningful employment upon release. In order to make sure that we are meeting the needs of women offenders, it is very important that we receive input from you regarding your perceptions of your needs and employment interests. In order to help us to better design employment programming for women, you will be asked to respond to questions that deal with the following subjects:
- a brief description of your background information (e.g., offence history, marital status, child-rearing responsibilities)
- your employment history (any past employment or training)
- your experiences with institutional employment or training
- your employment interests, beliefs, and perceived supports
- your suggestions for employment programs for women offenders
Your participation will involve completing a package of questionnaires. The package will take, at most, one hour to complete.
Right to Participate and Withdraw
It is important to understand that you are under no obligation to partake in this study. You have the right to withdraw at anytime. There will be no penalty if you decide to decline participation, or withdraw at any stage of the research.
Confidentiality
Strict confidentiality will be given for all of your responses. Each completed questionnaire will be seen only by the research team conducting the study. Individual information gathered from the study will not be released to any other CSC employee.
Informed Consent
My signature below indicates that I have read the above description of the study, and understand fully its requirements and purpose. I also understand my rights regarding confidentiality, voluntary participation, and withdrawal. I hereby give my consent to participate in the research project.
Name (Print): _________________________________
Signature: ____________________________________
Date: ____________________________
Note: Once you have signed this consent form, you may simply enclose it in the envelope provided with the questionnaire, or you may tear off this consent form and return it to your parole officer.
PLEASE NOTE : ONCE YOU HAVE COMPLETED THIS QUESTIONNAIRE, PLEASE FIRST ENCLOSE IT IN THE ENVELOPE MARKED "PROTECTED" AND SEAL IT. THEN PLACE THE "PROTECTED" ENVELOPE IN THE SECOND STAMPED, SELF-ADDRESSED ENVELOPE PROVIDED. SEAL THIS SECOND ENVELOPE AND RETURN IT TO YOUR PAROLE OFFICER TO BE MAILED TO THE RESEARCHERS.
General Employment Information: Community
- Today's Date _________________
- Age ___________
- Ethnicity (circle one)
- White
- Aboriginal
- Black
- Asian
- Other (specify) _______________
- Marital Status (circle one)
- Married
- Common Law (in a relationship more than 6 months)
- Divorced/Separated
- Widowed
- Girlfriend/boyfriend
- Single/Never Married
- Do you have any children? (circle one) Yes No If you do not have children , please skip directly to question #7 on the next page)
- If yes ,
- How many children do you have? ____________
- What are their ages? ___________________________________
- Prior to your incarceration, were you caring full-time for your children at home? (circle one) Yes No
- How many of your children are currently living with you? (please circle one response)
- all of them
- some of them (how many and what ages?) ____________________________
- none of them
- If any of your children are not living with you, do you expect that any of them will be living with you within the next year? If so, how many? and what ages?
- If any of your children are currently living with you (or if you expect them to be living with you within the next year):
- is there anyone who could care for them if you decided to work? (circle one) Yes No
- if yes, list who could care for them…. ________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- Who are you currently living with?
- Husband/wife, common-law partner, boyfriend/girlfriend
- Family of Origin (parents) or other family
- Friends
- Alone
- Strangers (e.g., hostel, half-way house)
- Moving around, changing
- Approximately one year from now , who do you expect that you will be living with?
- Husband/wife, common-law partner, boyfriend/girlfriend
- Family of Origin (parents) or other family
- Friends
- Alone
- Strangers (e.g., hostel, half-way house)
- Moving around, changing
- Don't know, not arranged yet
- What institution were you released from?
- Burnaby Correctional Centre for Women
- Edmonton Institution for Women
- Okimaw Ohci Healing Lodge
- Grand Valley Institution for Women
- Joliette Institution
- Nova Institution
- Other ________________________
- Current Offence (if more than one, report offence with longest sentence)
- Total Sentence Length _________
- What date did your sentence commence? ___________________
- Approximately how many years have you already served on your current sentence? ________
- What was the date of your current release to the community? ___________________
- Approximately how many months have you been on release? __________________
- What type of release are you on? (circle one)
_____________________________________________________
- Day Parole
- Full Parole
- Statutory Release
- Is this your first Federal Sentence? (circle one) Yes No
- In general what factors do you feel have contributed to your involvement in criminal behavior?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- What factors would help keep you out of trouble with the law in the future?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- What is the highest level of education you achieved while in school in the community? (highest grade level completed).
_____________________________________________________
- a) Have you done any upgrading since then? (circle one) Yes No
b) If yes, what is the Highest Grade Level you have completed up to now? ____
- Prior to your incarceration, what was your major source of income? (circle one)
- Employment
- Employment Insurance (Unemployment Insurance) or Disability
- Welfare/Social Assistance
- Mother's Allowance
- Spouse/Family
- Friends
- Illegal Activities
- Other(describe)______________________________
- i) Prior to your incarceration, did you ever engage in any other activities in order to make money? (circle any that apply)
- Exotic Dancing ( legal employment )
- Working "under the table" at any other job other than that already listed in options (a), (c), (d) …..( e.g., getting paid in cash for working but not claiming it on your income tax return ). Describe the job _______________________
- Drug Trade
- Prostitution
- Other (describe) _______________________________________
iii) If you engaged in any of the above activities, why did you?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- a) What hourly rate of pay do you think that you would have to make while working in order to meet your basic needs? __________________________________________________
b) Are you qualified for any jobs that would allow you to make that hourly wage?
(circle one) Yes No
c) If yes , please list the jobs below.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- a) Did you ever have any work experience outside the home prior to your incarceration? (circle one) Yes No
If Yes,
b) What was your occupation? (please report your most recent job prior to incarceration)
_____________________________________________________
c) What was your approximate hourly salary ? (most recent job prior to incarceration)
_____________________________________________________
d) Was this salary sufficient to meet your basic needs? (circle one) Yes No
Explain…
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
e) List any experience in any other types of employment in the community. (prior to incarceration)
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- How important is it for you to have a job? (circle one)
- Not very
- Somewhat
- Very Important
- How much support do you have from your spouse/family/important other(s) for finding/keeping work? (circle one)
- Not Much
- A Little
- Good Support
- Not Applicable
- How much does your spouse/family/important other(s) believe that having a job is important? (circle one)
- Not Very
- Somewhat
- Important
- Not Applicable
- a) Have you experienced any difficulties or had any problems when looking for work in the past, or currently? (circle one) Yes No
b) If yes, what were the difficulties/problems you experienced?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
c) Is there anything that you think could help you to deal with these problems in the future.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- i) To your knowledge, have you been refused employment due to your criminal record? (circle one) Yes No
If yes ,
ii) how many times did this happen? __________
iii) what was the reason given by the employer?
- Nature/type of your offense
- Does not want ex-offenders working for him/her
- Nature of the Job
- Other (specify) ______________________
- Currently , what is your main source of income? (circle one)
- Employment
- Employment Insurance or Disability
- Welfare/Social Assistance
- Mother's Allowance
- Spouse/Family
- Friends
- Other ________________
Institutional Training/Jobs
- a) Did you complete any vocational or employment training courses while you were incarcerated? (circle one) Yes No
b) If yes , please list them below.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- a) Were you employed while residing in the institution? (circle one) Yes No
b) If yes , what was your job (list all jobs you had if there was more than one) …
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- a) Did you ever participate in a work release while you were incarcerated?
(circle one) Yes No
b) If yes , what type of job did you have on your work release? __________________
Employment Services
- Who would you talk to if you simply needed information about how to get a job or how to support yourself in the community (e.g., get social assistance, write a résumé, find a job?)
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- a) Would you be interested in participating in any employment programs/services during your release? (circle one) Yes No
b) If yes , what would you find useful?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
c) If no , why not?
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
- Have you visited with an employment counselor since your release?
(circle one) Yes No
- a) Have you participated in job training programs/workshops since release? (circle one) Yes No
b) If yes , please list the types of programs/workshops below.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
c) If no , why have you not participated in any?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- How would you rate your ability to…
|
Poor |
Fair |
Good |
Excellent |
| a) Create a good resumer | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| b) Perform well during an job interview. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| c) Know where to look for a job | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
- a) Are you aware of any employment services in your community? (circle one) Yes No
b) If yes , please list them below?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- Do you have any suggestions for improving employment services to women on conditional release?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Employment Centers
The Correctional Service of Canada operates several Community Employment Centers designed to provide employment counselling and placement services for offenders in a number of communities in Canada.
- Have you ever been to a CSC Employment Center? (circle one) Yes No
- a) Prior to completing this questionnaire, were you aware that there were CSC Employment Centers in some communities? (circle one) Yes No
b) If yes, how did you learn about the Employment Center?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- a) Would you be interested in using the employment services offered by a CSC Employment Center? (circle one) Yes No
b) Explain why or why not…
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
If you have been to a CSC Employment Centre , please answer the following questions.
(If you have never been to a CSC Employment Centre, please do not complete these questions, please skip to the next page).
- How many times have you visited the Employment Centre? ________
- What types of services do you use when you are there? (circle any that apply)
- Employment Counselling
- Résumé Writing
- Job Search
- Interview Preparation
- Office Resources (computers, phone)
- Educational Upgrading
- Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS)
- Aptitude and Assessment Testing
- Other (describe) _______________________________
- What do you like most about the employment centre?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- What do you like least about the employment centre?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- What are your suggestions for improvement to the employment centres?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Advantages/Disadvantages of Employment
Advantages
I'd like you to imagine having a steady job (if you don't already have one). People say that certain good things can go along with this (e.g., nice house, good money). What are some good things you associate with having a steady job? List as many as you can think of:
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Disadvantages
Again, imagine having a steady job (if you don't already have one). People say that some bad things can go along with having a steady job (e.g., no free time, working for someone else). What are some bad things you associate with having a steady job? List as many as you can think of:
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
In general, how important do you think the following programs/services are for you .
| 1. Very Unimportant | 2. Somewhat Important | 3. Average Important | 4. Somewhat Important | 5. Very Important |
| 1. Aboriginal programs (e.g. Circles of Change; Spirit of a Warrior | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 2. Elder Counseling | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 3. Education Programs (e.g. Adult Basic Education) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 4. Employment Programs (e.g. Employability Skills; Vocational Training | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 5. Counselling Services (e.g., Psychologist) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 6. Survivors of Abuse & Trauma | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 7. Intensive Intervention Services (e.g., Dialectical Behaviour Therapy) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 8. Living Skills Programs (e.g., Reasoning & Rehabilitation; Anger & Emotions Management. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 9. Parenting Skills | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 10. Substance Abuse Programming | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 11. Chaplaincy Services | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Using the same scale above….
…How important do you think employment
opportunities/training/programs are perceived
to be by….
| 12. Parole Officers in the community ? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 13. by CSC National Headquarters? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Instructions: For the following items, indicate how you would compare yourself to the average worker your own age, using the rating scale provided. If you are not working right now, imagine how you think you would compare to other workers.
| 1 Worse than most workers | 3 Same as most workers | 5 Better than most workers |
| 1. Dependability | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 2. Pride in a job well done | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 3. Contribution to the company | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 4. Efforts to continually learn more about my job | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 5. Interest in further career growth | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 6. Judgment | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 7. Ability to deal with people | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 8. Co-workers can trust me | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 9. Ability to help co-workers with job-related problems | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 10. Energy level (endurance) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 11. Perseverance on difficult jobs | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 12. Ability to remember job details | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 13. Ability to be retrained for new jobs | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 14. Ability to handle complex jobs | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 15. Ability to adapt to changes in work group | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 16. Ability to communicate clearly on the job | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 17. Ability to support co-workers with personal problems | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 18. Ability to get along with "difficult" co-workers | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 19. Relevant experience | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 20. Ability to control quality of my work | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 21. Job safety habits/record | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 22. Ability to meet my work goals | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 23. Current skills | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 24. Ability to plan effectively | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 25. Knowledge of the latest technologies | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 26. Ability to learn from experience workers | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 27. Ability to tech/manage others | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 28. Knowing where to go in company for most kinds of help | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 29. Knowing how to get cooperation from other departments, co-workers | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Instructions: Please indicate the response that best describes your position since release.
| 1. None | 2. Few | 3. Several | 4. Most |
|---|
| 1. Think of your best friends: that is, those close friends who you have seen most frequently since release.... | ||||
| a) Do any of them have full-time jobs? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| b) Are any of them the type of person who enjoys working for a living? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 2. Think of the people you know and have been associating with since release.... | ||||
| a) Do any of them have full-time jobs? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| b) Are any of them the type of person who enjoys working for a living? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| 1. No | 2. Not sure | 3. Yes | 4. Definitely yes |
|---|
| 3. If I want to find a job, I'd know where to go or who to see. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 4. If I want to get some informatio about work, I'd know where to go, or who to see. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 5. If I was planning to find a job, I know some people who could and would help me to fins one. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 6. While I might not call them friends and I might not see them very ofgen, I know some people who have full-time jobs. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 7. I know of at least one person in my neighbourhood or area of town who appears to be doing "just fine" as a result of his/her employment. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 8. In my neighbourhood or area of town, there are people who have jobs and are liked and respected by others in the neighbourhood. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
| 9. In my neighbourhood or area of town, there are people who have jobs and they are disliked and not respected by others in the neighbourhood. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
Instructions: Please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with each of these statements. When responding to these items, please think about the people that you consider to be family.
When answering the following questions, please think about your current job. If you are not working right now, think back to your last job in the community if you had one, and answer these questions in response to that job.
Please indicate whether you are completing the questions on this page with reference to
(select one):
_____ Your job now
_____ Your last job (approximately how long ago was this?) ____________________
_____ Never Employed
Note: If you have never been employed, then do not complete the scale on this page, and move directly to the scale on the next page.
| 1. Very Strongly Disagree | 2. Strongly Disagree | 3. Slightly Disagree | 4. Undecided | 5. Slightly Agree | 6. Strongly Agree | 7. Very Strongly Agree |
| 1. I have people in my family that I can talk to about the problems I have at work. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 2. No one in my family can really understand how tough my job can be. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 3. When my job gets me down, I always know that I can turn to my family and get the support I need to feel better. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 4. There is really no one in my family that I can talk to about my job. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 5. My family can't really help me much when my job gets me tense. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 6. It's a good thing that I have my family around when things aren't going well at work. they can really understand me and make me feel better. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
- Are you currently employed outside of the home? (circle one) Yes No
Complete the following questions if you are CURRENTLY EMPLOYED
(If you are currently unemployed or caring for your children at home , please skip to
page 19)
- What is your current job? _________________________________
- Number of hours worked per week (on average) _______________
- Salary earned per week (take home): _______________________
- How satisfied are you with your current job? (circle one)
- Very Unsatisfied
- Somewhat Unsatisfied
- Neither Unsatisfied or Satisfied
- Somewhat Satisfied
- Very Satisfied
- How satisfied are you with your pay level? (circle one)
- Very Unsatisfied
- Somewhat Unsatisfied
- Neither Unsatisfied or Satisfied
- Somewhat Satisfied
- Very Satisfied
- Does your salary meet your basic needs (e.g., rent, bills, food, etc.)? Yes No
- a) Did you previously (prior to or during incarceration) have any training/experience in the type of job you have now? (circle one) Yes No
- Did you intend to find a job? (circle one)
- No
- Maybe
- Yes
- How would you rate your chances of keeping your job in the next 6 months? (circle one)
- Poor
- OK
- Good
- Is your current employment related to work experience you had before your incarceration? (circle one)
- No
- Yes
- Not applicable (not employed before incarceration)
- Is your current employment related to vocational training programs that you completed while incarcerated?
- No
- Yes
- Not applicable (haven't taken vocational training)
- Is your current employment related to CORCAN work experience during incarceration?
- No
- Yes
- Not applicable (did not work for CORCAN)
- Is your current employment related to "Employment Skills" training taken during your incarceration?
- No
- Yes
- Not applicable (did not take program)
- What is the reason that you are not currently employed outside the home?
- Currently working in the home (caring for children)
- Have applied for jobs, but haven't found one yet
- Currently taking other programs
- Currently Attending School
- Unable to Work (Disability, Health)
- Not Interested in Working
- Other (describe)____________________________________
- Do you intend to find a job? (circle one)
- No
- Maybe
- Yes
- How would you rate your chances of finding a job in the next 6 months?
- Poor
- OK
- Good
- Are you currently searching for a job? (circle one) Yes No
- What type of work are you looking for?
- On average, how many hours do you spend looking for work in a week? _____
- How many jobs have you applied for since your release? _____
- List the types of jobs below?
- Age ____________
- Gender ____________
- What is your Current Position? ______ __________________ ________________
- Where are you currently working? (circle one)
- Fraser Valley Institution
- Edmonton Institution
- Okimaw Ohci Healing Lodge
- Grand Valley Institution
- Joliette Institution
- Nova Institution
- How long have you been employed in your position at this institution? _____________
- How long have you been working in corrections? ____ ______ ________
- How long have you been working with women offenders? __ __ ______
- List any advantages you perceive to employment or employment training for women in the institution?
- List any disadvantages you perceive to employment or employment training for women in the institution?
- a) On the whole, do you think that women offenders make good workers?
- a) Do you think that work releases are a good idea? (circle one) Yes No
- a) Have you perceived any changes (positive or negative) in the women as a result of engaging in employment or employment training? (circle one) Yes No
- a) Do you perceive any problems/difficulties with current employment programming for women? (circle one) Yes No
- a) Do you perceive any resistance to employment opportunities or employment training programs by other staff at the institution?
- Do you have any suggestions for improving employment programming for women in the institution?
- Age ____________
- Gender ____________
- What is your Current Position (i.e., Job Title)? __________________________
- At which Community Employment Centre are you currently working?
____________________________________
- Where is your Centre located? (City, Province) _________________________
- How long have you been employed at this centre? ______________________
- How long have you been working in the area of employment counselling…
- In general? _____________
- With offenders? __________
- How long have you been working with offenders in any capacity? __________
- Have you ever worked with any women offenders at your centre? (circle one) Yes No
- Approximately how many women offenders have you worked with at this centre, over the past year? ____________
- In what capacity have you worked with women offenders? (e.g., helping to use job search tools, teaching job search skills, etc.). List any that apply.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
- List any advantages/benefits you perceive to employment or employment training for women offenders in the community.
- List any potential barriers you perceive to meaningful employment for women offenders.
- a) Do you believe the employment-related experiences and needs of male offenders and women offenders differ? (circle one) Yes No
- Using the scale below….
- a) On average, how many women offenders would you estimate visit your centre on any given day? _______
- Over the last month, how would you describe your client population with respect to the percentage of male versus female clients (e.g., 50% male and 50% female)?
- Community Employment Centres are designed to help recently released offenders in Canada to become "job ready". Are there any opportunities for other individuals in the community to use your centre (e.g., individuals who have completed their federal sentences, provincial offenders, non-offenders)? Explain.
- a) Do you think more women offenders should be using your centre?
- a) Are there any employees or services at your centre currently directed specifically or exclusively towards helping women offenders gain employment or employability skills? (circle one) Yes No
- How are offenders made aware of the services offered by your centre?
- a) Do you feel that the means used to disseminate information regarding your centre are successful in reaching the women offender population?
- Is there anything else that you would recommend doing to inform women offenders about your centre and the services you provide?
- In your opinion, what are the services/skills that women most need in order to increase their chances of obtaining meaningful work?
- What types of services do women offenders use when they visit the centre?
- Employment Counselling
- Résumé Writing
- Job Search
- Interview Preparation
- Office Resources (computers, phone)
- Educational Upgrading
- Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS)
- Aptitude and Assessment Testing
- Other (describe) _______________________________
- Women have visited the centre, but I'm not sure what services they used.
- To my knowledge, no women have used our centre.
- Are there any additional services that you think should be offered in order to help women offenders in the employment domain?
- a) In your experience, what types of jobs are women offenders looking for when they come to your centre? (If you don't have any experience dealing with female clients, please simply indicate that here, and move on to question #13).
- Other than your centre, please list any other employment programs or services available to women offenders in your community or in near-by areas.
- a. Do you perceive any problems/difficulties with current employment programming/services for women offenders? (circle one) Yes No
- Do you feel that there is anything that could be done prior to women offenders' release (i.e., in the institution) to better prepare them to obtain employment upon release to the community?
- In general, do you have any additional suggestions for improving employment services/opportunities/initiatives for women offenders?
- What is your current position?
- How long have you been employed in this position at your present institution?
- How long have you been working in corrections, in general?
- How long have you been working with women offenders?
- How are women assigned to specific employment assignment or training opportunity? (e.g., according to their interests or to what's available?)
- Are there any difficulties trying to schedule employment training or work programs for the women (i.e., conflicting schedules with other programs, other commitments…)? Explain.
- Do you feel that there are sufficient employment programs and services for women in the institution who want them? Explain.
- a) Are you aware of any employment programs or opportunities that are under high demand by the women? If yes, please list them…
- Are you aware of any employment programs or services for women on release in the community in near-by areas? List…
- Do you feel that the types of employment opportunities or training programs that are offered to women in the institution are commensurate with the types of opportunities that are available to them and that they will be interested in pursuing in the community? Explain.
- How do you perceive the link between employment opportunities in the institution and services available to women offenders in the community? Is there anything you would do to improve continuity between these two areas?
- Do you have any suggestions for improving employment opportunities or initiatives for women? (….try not to prompt at first but if not getting much….anything to do to improve access/participation/types of opportunities…)
- Did you also complete the questionnaire that was distributed around the institution? If not would you like to?
- How long have you been employed in your position as parole officer?
- How long have you been working in corrections, in general?
- How long have you been working with women offenders?
- Approximately what number/percentage of male and female offenders do you currently have on your caseload?
- Do you perceive any resistance to employment programs and services by other parole officers in the community? If so, please explain.
- Are you aware of any employment programs or services for women in the community in your area? Could you please list them?
- How are women assigned to any employment training or employment programs that are available?
- a) Are you aware of any employment programs or opportunities that are under high demand by the women?
- Do you feel that there are sufficient employment programs and services for women in the community who want them? Explain.
- Are there any difficulties trying to schedule employment training or work opportunities for the women (i.e., conflicting schedules with other programs, other commitments…)? Explain.
- Do you perceive any potential barriers/challenges to meaningful employment for women offenders?
- How much do you know about the types of employment opportunities and training that are available to women in the institution? Explain.
- (…If they have some awareness of the types of programs…then…)
- Do you feel that the types of employment opportunities or training programs that are offered to women in the institution are commensurate with the types of opportunities that are available to them and that they will be interested in pursuing in the community? Explain.
- How do you perceive the link between employment opportunities in the institution and services available to women offenders in the community? Is there anything you would do to improve continuity between these areas?
- Do you have any suggestions for improving employment opportunities or initiatives for women?
- How long have you been employed in this position?
- How long have you been working in corrections, in general?
- a) How would you describe your role as an employment coordinator?
- Do you feel that there are currently sufficient employment programs and services for women offenders who want them? Explain.
- a) Could you describe any current employment programs/services available for women offenders in your region? Would it be possible to obtain a list (e.g., send by email/fax/mail)?
- a) Would you say that you experience any unique challenges when it comes to developing or providing employment services for women offenders?
- Using the scale below:
- Do you perceive any resistance to employment programs and services for women by:
- Staff in the institutions? Explain…
- Staff in the community? Explain…
- a) How important is the link between employment opportunities in the institution and services available to women offenders in the community?
- With respect to institutional or regional programs/services…
- How much standardization is there across institutions/community regions in terms of programs/services? (e.g., are there any designated “essential” or “core” employment programs or services…).
- How much flexibility is there with respect to implementing new institutional/regional programs (e.g., are there standard guidelines/rules regarding the kinds of programs that can be funded, or the specific region/institution where they might be implemented).
- How much sharing of information is there across institutions/regions (e.g., types of programs/services, best practices, etc.)
- Do you have any additional comments to make or any suggestions regarding the future of employment programming for women offenders?
- How long have you been employed in this position?
- How long have you been working in corrections, in general?
- With respect to the role and function of CORCAN…
- What would you say are the key employees/organizations that you need to create and maintain relationships with to ensure CORCAN is able to provide programs and services to offenders?
- What proportion of your time and resources do you currently direct toward employment programming and services for women offenders versus male offenders? (If one currently requires more time/effort - then why?)
- With respect to this position, what proportion of your time and resources do you currently direct toward programs and services in the institution versus the community for women offenders? (If one area currently requires more time/effort - then why?)
- Do you feel that there are currently sufficient employment programs and services for women offenders who want them? Explain.
- With respect to current employment programs/services available to women offenders…were any of these programs designed specifically or exclusively for women offenders? (or were they designed for men, but women have access to them?) If yes, please describe.
- Would you say that you experience any unique challenges when it comes to developing or providing employment services for women offenders?
- Are there any difficulties trying to organize or deliver employment training or work opportunities for women offenders (e.g., if they don't mention it…any issues related to the small population of women offenders and the challenge of implementing cost-effective programming for them)?
- How difficult is it to achieve a balance between operating an efficient, cost-effective agency and the need to deliver programs and services to meet offenders' needs and facilitate reintegration?
- Do you have any suggestions for dealing with these challenges?
- Using the scale below:
- Do you perceive any resistance to employment programs and services for women by:
- Staff in the institutions? Explain…
- Staff in the community? Explain…
- a) How important is the link between employment opportunities in the institution and services available to women offenders in the community?
- With respect to institutional or regional programs/services…
- How much standardization is there across institutions/community regions in terms of programs/services? (e.g., are there any designated “essential” or “core” employment programs or services…).
- How much flexibility is there with respect to implementing new institutional/regional programs (e.g., are there standard guidelines/rules regarding the kinds of programs that can be funded, or the specific region/institution where they might be implemented).
- How much sharing of information is there across institutions/regions (e.g., types of programs/services, best practices, etc.)
- Do you have any additional comments to make or any suggestions regarding the future of employment programming for women offenders?
b) If yes , describe (type of training, when, and was it in community or institution)
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
If you are currently employed and have completed this page , then you are done!
Complete this section only if you are NOT CURRENTLY EMPLOYED
If yes ,
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
END OF QUESTIONNAIRE
Please put in envelopes provided, seal, and return to your parole officer for mailing.
Appendix H: Questionnaire – Institutional Staff
Purpose, Objectives, and Requirements
The objective of this study is to examine opportunities for employment and employment training for women offenders. In conjunction with this goal, we would like to obtain staff perceptions of employment programming for women. The questionnaires include items related to your beliefs regarding offender employment programs in general, as well as your perceptions of the advantages or disadvantages associated with offender employment and employment training programs. Finally, you will be asked about your suggestions for improvement to employment programming in the future. The questionnaire will take approximately 30 minutes to complete.
Right to Participate and Withdraw
It is important to understand that you are under no obligation to partake in this study. You have the right to withdraw at anytime. There will be no penalty if you decide to decline participation, or withdraw at any stage of the research.
Confidentiality
Strict confidentiality will be maintained for all responses. Only our research team will view and analyze completed questionnaires. Individual information gathered from the study will not be released to any other CSC employee. None of your individual responses will be used in any way to personally evaluate your present or future performance with the Correctional Service of Canada.
If you have any questions or concerns dealing with the research project you may contact the principal researchers at the Research Branch, National Headquarters:
| Kendra Delveaux | Kelley Blanchette |
| Research Manager | Director, Women Offender Research |
| Phone: (613) 943-2599 | Phone: (613) 947-8866 |
| E-mail: delveauxke@csc-scc.gc.ca | E-mail: blanchettekd@csc-scc.gc.ca |
Informed Consent
My signature below indicates that I have read the above description of the study, and understand fully its requirements and purpose. I also understand my rights regarding confidentiality, voluntary participation, and withdrawal. I hereby give my consent to participate in the research project.
Note: In addition to these questionnaires, we will be conducting some telephone interviews with interested staff members to further discuss employment issues for women offenders. These phone interviews will be occurring within the next few months and will take approximately ½ hour to conduct. Would you also be interested in participating in a telephone interview? Yes No
If you are interested in participating in a telephone interview, please list your email and/or telephone number below so that we might contact you to schedule a convenient time for the interview. Thank you!
Phone #: ( ) __________________ E-mail: _________________________________
Name (Print) __________________________________
Signature: _____________________________________ Date: ____________________
Note: Once you have signed this consent form, you may simply enclose it in the envelope provided with the questionnaire, or you may mail it in a separate envelope.
PLEASE NOTE : ONCE YOU HAVE COMPLETED THIS QUESTIONNAIRE, PLEASE ENCLOSE IT IN THE ENVELOPE PROVIDED, SEAL IT AND MAIL IT.
Staff Survey: Institution (Any Interested Staff)
Below is a list of goals that one might attempt to achieve through the use of employment programming. Please rate each goal according to how important you feel it should be. Circle the number that represents your rating on the set of numbers following each statement. There is no right or wrong response; indicate your own evaluation as to the importance of each goal.
| Not at all Important | Average Importance | Very Important |
|---|
| 1. To provide each inmate employed in the institution with a high level of a specific vocational skill (e.g., welding, upholstering, etc.). | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 2. To develop in each offender the minimum qualifications necessary to hold a job, (i.e.,general job skills, the ability to follow instructions, follow safety rules, etc.). | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 3. To develop in each offender a set of positive attitudes toward work and the work situation (work is desirable, important, satisfying, etc.). | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 4. To provide inmates with the opportunity to accumulate sufficient savings to "tide them over" upon release until they are established in a stable employment situation. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 5. To help inmates iarn sufficient funds for paying cut-standing debts, fines, court cots, or restitution to their victims. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 6. To enable inmates to contribute to the support of their families while incarcerated. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 7. To help underwrite the cost of the total correctional program. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 8. To constructively occupy the time of the inmate population. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 9. To provide low-cost/quality goods for the available markets in the country. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 10. To develop in each inmate employed in industries attitudes favourable to living a law-abiding life. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 11. To provide the inmate with sufficient funds to make commissary purchases. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 12. To secure job placement for inmates about to be released. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 13. To make a profit for the Correctional Service of Canada. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Below is a series of statements describing how a variety of different people feel institutional industry or employment programs should operate. For each statement circle the number which indicates the degree to which you agree or disagree with it, according to the scale below.
| 1. Strongly Agree | 2. Agree | 3. Don't Know | 4. Disagree | 5. Strongly Disagree |
|---|
| 1. The development of specific job skills, (i.e. employment training for offenders should be more important in selecting a specific operation for prision industry than the amount of profit it could return). | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 2. Union membership should be obtained for inmates about to be released who have been trained for jobs requiring such membersip. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 3. When evaluating inmates"parole eligibility, the parole board should place considerable weight on their performance in employment programming in the institution if it is identified as a risk factor. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 4. External groups and industries should be encouraged to provide special training (e.g. short courses) within the institution. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 5. Paid vacations (time off work) should be provided for inmates who work in correctional employment programs for relatively long periods of time. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 6. Inmates should work a full 8-hour day under conditions similar to employment in the community. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 7. Some institutional employment programs should be managed by private companies rather than the government. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 8. Institutional employment programs should produce goods that require operations and skills similar to those required to work in the communities located in the province. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 9. Efforts should be directed to employing as many offenders as possible outside the institution (e.g., on work release). | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 10. Institutional employment industries/programs should be abolished. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Please rate the following statements according to the degree to which you believe the statements to be true or false.
| 1. Completely True | 2. Somewhat True | 3. Don't Know | 4. Somewhat False | 5. Completely False |
|---|
| 1. Presures to make employment programs profitable can frequently interfere with training and rehabilitative goals. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 2. Employment programs do not provide real vocational training but rather minimal on-the-job training. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 3. It is impossible to make the work situation in institutional employment programs sufficiently like that of employment opportunities in the community to make it a valuable experience for inmates. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 4. The level of work expected of offenders is equal to that expected by employers in the community. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 5. The work skills and habits acquired by offenders are few. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 6. Many offenders put the job skills they learn in the institution to use upon release in the community. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 7.A profit orientation is necessaty in order to maintain a realistic work atmosphere. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 8. The existence of prison employment programs presents a threat to the jobs of non-offenders. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 9. An offender who has worked in institutional employment programs could potentially be a good worker upon release to the community. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 10. Prison employment programs should be judged first by their contribution to rehabilitation and only secondarily in terms of profit and loss. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 11. Compared to other institutional programs (e.g., counseling substance abuse, cognitive skills,) a successful placement in a prison industry job should be considered somewhat less important when deciding whether to recommend and offender for parole. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 12. The artificial work environment existing within the prison system cannot adequately prepare offenders to function properly in the community. | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
(circle one) Yes No
b) Explain.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
b) Why or why not?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
b) If yes, please describe...
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
b) Explain.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
(circle one) Yes No
b) If yes , please explain.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
In general, how important do you think the following programs/services are for women.
| 1. Very Unimportant | 2. Somewhat Unimportant | 3. Average Importance | 4. Somewhat Important | 5. Very Important |
| 1. Aboriginal Programs (e.g., Circles of Changes, Spirit of a Warrior). | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 2. Elder Counselling | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 3. Education Programs (e.g., Adult Basic Education) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 4. Employment Programs (e.g., Employability Skills; Vocational Training) | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 5. Counselling Services (e.g., Psychologist). | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 6. Survivors of Abuse & Trauma | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 7. Intensive Intervention Services (e.g., Dialectical Behaviour Therapy). | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 8. Living Skills Programs (e.g., Reasoning & Rehabilitation; Anger & Emotions Management). | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 9. Parenting Skills | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 10. Substance Abuse Programming | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 11. Chaplaincy Services | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Using the same scale above….
…How important do you think employment
opportunities/training/programs are perceived
to be by….
| 12. other staff at your institution? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 13. the women? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 14. by CSC National Headquarters? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Appendix I: Questionnaire – Community Employment Centre Staff
Purpose, Objectives, and Requirements
The objective of this study is to examine opportunities for employment and employment training for women offenders. In conjunction with this goal, we would like to obtain staff perceptions of employment programming for women. The questionnaire includes items related to your beliefs regarding offender employment programs in general, as well as your perceptions of women offenders' use and knowledge of CSC Community Employment Centers. Finally, you will be asked about your suggestions for improvement to employment programming in the future. The questionnaire will take approximately 30 minutes to complete.
Right to Participate and Withdraw
It is important to understand that you are under no obligation to partake in this study. You have the right to withdraw at anytime. There will be no penalty if you decide to decline participation, or withdraw at any stage of the research.
Confidentiality
Strict confidentiality will be maintained for all responses. Only our research team will view and analyze completed questionnaires. Individual information gathered from the study will not be released to any other CSC employee. None of your individual responses will be used in any way to personally evaluate your present or future performance with the Correctional Service Canada.
If you have any questions or concerns dealing with the research project you may contact the principal researchers at the Research Branch, National Headquarters:
Kendra Delveaux Research Manager Phone: (613) 943-2599 E-mail: delveauxke@csc-scc.gc.ca |
Kelley Blanchette Director, Women Offender Research Phone: (613) 947-8866 E-mail: blanchettekd@csc-scc.gc.ca |
Informed Consent
My signature below indicates that I have read the above description of the study, and understand fully its requirements and purpose. I also understand my rights regarding confidentiality, voluntary participation, and withdrawal. I hereby give my consent to participate in the research project.
Name (Print) __________________________________
Signature: ____________________________________ Date: ____________________
Note: Once you have signed this consent form, you may simply enclose it in the envelope provided with the questionnaire, or if you would feel more comfortable submitting the questionnaire without having your name attached to it, you may detach the consent form and return it in a separate envelope (to the same address as listed on the envelope provided).
PLEASE NOTE : ONCE YOU HAVE COMPLETED THIS QUESTIONNAIRE, PLEASE ENCLOSE IT IN THE ENVELOPE MARKED "PROTECTED". THEN PLACE THE ENVELOPE INSIDE THE SECOND, SELF-ADDRESSED ENVELOPE, AND MAIL IT TO THE ADDRESS PROVIDED.
Staff Survey: Community Employment Centres
If yes,
Beliefs Regarding Women and Employment
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
b) If yes , describe the differences.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
How important do you think employment opportunities/training/programs are perceived to be by..
| 1. Very Inimportant | 2. Somewhat Unimportant | 3. Average Importance | 4. Somewhat Important | 5. Very Important |
|---|
| a) women offenders? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| b) parole officers in the community? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| c) CSC National Headquarters? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Offender Use/Knowledge of Employment Centre/Services
b) On average, how many male offenders would you estimate visit your centre on any given day? ________
________ % Female Offenders
________ % Male Offenders
(circle one) Yes No
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
(circle one) Yes No
If yes,
b) Why do you think women offenders have not been making as much use of your centre as they might?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
c) What do you suggest could be done to improve women offenders' use of the centre?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
b) If yes , please describe the staff members' job title and role, or the specific service in question.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
(circle one) Yes Somewhat No
b) Explain.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
(circle any that apply)
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
b) In your experience, what type of jobs do women offenders obtain through your centre?
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Future Directions for Employment Programming/Counselling Services
b. If yes, please explain.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Appendix J: Interview – Institutional Staff
Correctional Service Canada
Women Offender Research
First, I want to make sure that you are aware of your rights concerning participation in this evaluation and to make sure you are well informed about the study. I would just like to give you a brief description of the project, and then give you the opportunity to decide whether you wish to participate.
The objective of this study is to examine opportunities for employment and employment training for women offenders. In conjunction with this goal, we would like to obtain staff perceptions of employment programming for women. The interview includes items related to your knowledge of and beliefs regarding offender employment programs in general, as well as your perceptions of the benefits or problems associated with offender employment. Finally, you will be asked about your suggestions for improvement to employment programming in the future.
The interview will take approximately 30 minutes. If you wish, you may choose not to answer certain questions or you may terminate the interview at any point for any reason.
Strict confidentiality will be maintained for all responses. Individual information gathered from the study will not be released to any other CSC employee. None of your individual responses will be used in anyway to personally evaluate your present or future performance with the Correctional Service Canada.
Do you agree to participate in this telephone interview?
Name: _______________________________
Institution: ____________________________
Date: ____________________
Verbal Consent Given? _____
Interviewer's Name: ______________________
b) If yes…Why these opportunities/programs? (prestige?/pay?/hours?)
Appendix K: Interviews – Community Parole Officers
Correctional Service Canada
Women Offender Research
First, I want to make sure that you are aware of your rights concerning participation in this evaluation and to make sure you are well informed about the study. I would just like to give you a brief description of the project, and then give you the opportunity to decide whether you wish to participate.
The objective of this study is to examine opportunities for employment and employment training for women offenders. In conjunction with this goal, we would like to obtain staff perceptions of employment programming for women. The interview includes items related to your knowledge of and beliefs regarding offender employment programs in general, as well as your perceptions of the benefits or problems associated with offender employment. Finally, you will be asked about your suggestions for improvement to employment programming in the future.
The interview will take approximately 30 minutes. If you wish, you may choose not to answer certain questions or you may terminate the interview at any point for any reason.
Strict confidentiality will be maintained for all responses. Individual information gathered from the study will not be released to any other CSC employee. None of your individual responses will be used in anyway to personally evaluate your present or future performance with the Correctional Service Canada.
Do you agree to participate in this telephone interview?
Name: _______________________________
Parole Office: __________________________
Region: ____________________
Date: ______________________
Verbal Consent Given? _______
Interviewer's Name: ______________________
| 1. Very Unimportant | 2. Somewhat Unimportant | 3. Average Importance | 4. Somewhat Important | 5. Very Important |
|---|
| 5. Using the abose scale: |
| a) How important do you think that employment programs and services are for women offenders? | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
b) (depending on their answer above....) Explain why you think they are important? ( or why they are not important?
|
c) Do you perceive any advantages or disadvantages to employment or employment programming for women in the community?
|
6. Using the scale above........ How imporant do you think employment programs and services for women offenders are perceived to be by........... |
| b) other parole officers in the community | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| c) the women on release | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| d). by nation Headquarters | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
(e.g., according to their interests or to what's available?)
(e.g., do they request it or suggested by parole officers?)
b) Why these opportunities/programs? (prestige?/pay?/hours?)
(….try not to prompt at first but if not getting much….anything to do to improve access/participation/types of opportunities…)
Appendix L: CORCAN Regional Staff
Correctional Service Canada
Women Offender Research
First, I want to make sure that you are aware of your rights concerning participation in this evaluation and to make sure you are well informed about the study. I would just like to give you a brief description of the project, and then give you the opportunity to decide whether you wish to participate.
The objective of this study is to examine opportunities for employment and employment training for women offenders. In conjunction with this goal, we would like to learn a bit more about your role as an Employment Coordinator. We would also like to determine your perceptions of the current state of employment programming for women and how we should direct our efforts for the future.
The interview will take approximately 1 hour. If you wish, you may choose not to answer certain questions or you may terminate the interview at any point for any reason.
Strict confidentiality will be maintained for all responses. Individual information gathered from the study will not be released to any other CSC employee. None of your individual responses will be used in anyway to personally evaluate your present or future performance with the Correctional Service Canada.
Do you agree to participate in this telephone interview?
Name: _______________________________
Region: ______________________________
Date: ___________________
Verbal Consent Given? _____
Interviewer's Name: ______________________
b) What other employees/organizations do you need to create and maintain relationships with to carry out this role?
c) With respect to this position, what proportion of your time and resources do you currently direct toward employment programming and services for women offenders versus male offenders? (If one currently requires more time/effort - then why?)
d). With respect to this position, what proportion of your time and resources do you currently direct towards the institution versus the community ?
b) Were any of these programs designed specifically or exclusively for women offenders (or were they designed for men, but women have access to them)? If yes, please describe.
c) Are you aware of any employment programs or opportunities that you perceive to be under high demand by the women? If yes, please list them.
d). If yes, why do you think they are so sought-after?
b) Are there any difficulties trying to organize or deliver employment training or work opportunities for women offenders (e.g., if they don't mention it…any issues related to the small population of women offenders and the challenge of implementing cost-effective programming for them)?
c) How difficult is it to achieve a balance between operating an efficient, cost-effective agency and the need to deliver programs and services to meet offenders' needs and facilitate reintegration?
d). Do you have any suggestions for dealing with these challenges?
| 1. Very Unimportant | 2. Somewhat Unimportant | 3. Average Importance | 4. Somewhat Important | 5. Very Important |
|---|
| How important do you think employment programs and services for women offenders are perceived to be by....... | |||||
| a) institutinal staff | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| b) parole officers in the community | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| c) women in the institutions | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| d). women on release in the community | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| e). National Headquarters | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
b) How would you describe the current level of continuity/coordination of programs/services in these two areas?
Appendix M: Interview – CORCAN National Staff
Correctional Service Canada
Women Offender Research
First, I want to make sure that you are aware of your rights concerning participation in this evaluation and to make sure you are well informed about the study. I would just like to give you a brief description of the project, and then give you the opportunity to decide whether you wish to participate.
The objective of this study is to asses the employment needs of women offenders and to investigate opportunities for employment and employment training for women. Thus, we would like to ask you to a bit more about the current state of employment programming for women as well as any particular challenges that you might perceive to the development of employment programming for women. Finally, we would like to solicit your suggestions for future directions in the area of employment programming for women.
The interview will take approximately 1 hour. If you wish, you may choose not to answer certain questions or you may terminate the interview at any point for any reason.
Strict confidentiality will be maintained for all responses. Individual information gathered from the study will not be released to any other CSC employee. None of your individual responses will be used in anyway to personally evaluate your present or future performance with the Correctional Service Canada.
Informed Consent
My signature below indicates that I have read the above description of the study, and understand fully its requirements and purpose. I also understand my rights regarding confidentiality, voluntary participation, and withdrawal. I hereby give my consent to participate in the research project.
Name (Print) __________________________________
Signature: _________________________________ Date: ____________________
| 1. Very Unimportant | 2. Somewhat Unimportant | 3. Average Importance | 4. Somewhat Important | 5. Very Important |
|---|
| How important do you think employment programs and services for women offenders are perceived to be by...... | |||||
| a) institutinal staff | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| b) parole officers in the community | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| c) women in the institutions | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| d). women on release in the community | 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
b) How would you describe the current level of continuity/coordination of programs/services in these two areas?
Appendix N: Number (Percentage) of Women Offenders Serving Sentences in the Institution and in the Community (May 1 st , 2004) with Identified Needs in the Employment Domain from the Dynamic Factors Identification Analysis at Intake
Employment Domain |
Institution |
Community |
|
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N |
(%) |
n |
(%) |
Chi-Square |
|
Overall Employment Need Level (n = 773) |
221 |
(60%) |
221 |
(55%) |
1.67 |
Ability |
|
|
|
|
|
Less than grade 8 |
74 |
(21%) |
47 |
(13%) |
9.47 |
Less than grade 10 |
172 |
(49%) |
121 |
(33%) |
20.96*** |
No high school diploma |
252 |
(72%) |
219 |
(59%) |
13.47*** |
Finds learning difficult |
90 |
(26%) |
46 |
(12%) |
21.58*** |
Learning disabilities |
46 |
(14%) |
27 |
(7%) |
7.47 |
Physical problems which interfere with learning |
17 |
(5%) |
15 |
(4%) |
0.29 |
Memory problems |
70 |
(20%) |
58 |
(16%) |
2.63 |
Concentration problems |
107 |
(31%) |
64 |
(17%) |
18.24*** |
Problems with reading |
61 |
(18%) |
42 |
(11%) |
5.79 |
Problems with writing |
67 |
(19%) |
39 |
(11%) |
11.02*** |
Problems with numeracy |
105 |
(30%) |
76 |
(21%) |
8.96 |
Difficulty comprehending instructions |
37 |
(11%) |
17 |
(5%) |
9.67 |
Lacks a skill area/trade/profession |
216 |
(62%) |
201 |
(54%) |
4.17 |
Dissatisfied with skill area/trade/profession |
159 |
(46%) |
163 |
(44%) |
0.37 |
Physical problems interfere with work |
73 |
(21%) |
62 |
(17%) |
1.99 |
Work Record |
|
|
|
|
|
No employment history |
82 |
(23%) |
47 |
(13%) |
14.18*** |
Unemployed at the time of arrest |
273 |
(78%) |
247 |
(66%) |
11.58*** |
Unemployed 90% or more |
196 |
(56%) |
140 |
(38%) |
23.84*** |
Unemployed 50% or more |
259 |
(74%) |
213 |
(58%) |
22.06*** |
Unstable job history |
252 |
(72%) |
207 |
(56%) |
20.32*** |
Often shows up late for work |
13 |
(4%) |
20 |
(5%) |
1.09 |
Poor attendance record |
18 |
(5%) |
29 |
(8%) |
2.02 |
Difficulty meeting workload requirements |
14 |
(4%) |
8 |
(2%) |
2.11 |
Lacks initiative |
46 |
(13%) |
30 |
(8%) |
5.00 |
Quit a job without another |
122 |
(35%) |
143 |
(39%) |
1.11 |
Been laid off from work |
83 |
(24%) |
103 |
(28%) |
1.65 |
Been fired from a job |
61 |
(18%) |
75 |
(20%) |
0.91 |
Rewards |
|
|
|
|
|
Salary has been insufficient |
114 |
(33%) |
147 |
(40%) |
3.77 |
Lack employment benefits |
154 |
(44%) |
170 |
(46%) |
0.27 |
Job lacks security |
128 |
(37%) |
151 |
(41%) |
1.36 |
Co-worker Relations |
|
|
|
|
|
Difficulty with co-workers |
14 |
(4%) |
7 |
(2%) |
2.89 |
Supervisory Relations |
|
|
|
|
|
Difficulties with superiors |
26 |
(7%) |
15 |
(4%) |
3.96 |
Interventions |
|
|
|
|
|
Prior vocational assessments |
49 |
(14%) |
41 |
(11%) |
1.56 |
Participated in employment programs |
95 |
(28%) |
102 |
(27%) |
0.00 |
Completed an occupational development program |
36 |
(10%) |
43 |
(12%) |
0.26 |
Note : The Dynamic Factors Identification Analysis (DFIA) is conducted as part of the Offender Intake Assessment (OIA) implemented by Correctional Service of Canada. Data regarding the overall employment domain were available for 773 women (371 institutional women; 402 community women). The effective sample size for the individual indicators ranged from n = 708 to n = 723 depending on the amount of missing data for each indicator.
*** p < .001 Due to the large number of chi-square tests to be conducted, a significance level of .001 was adopted to determine significance of the comparisons shown in the table above.
Appendix O: Number (Percentage) of Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Women Offenders (May 1 st , 2004) with Identified Needs in the Employment Domain from the Dynamic Factors Identification Analysis at Intake
Employment Domain |
Non-Aboriginal |
Aboriginal |
|
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n |
(%) |
n |
(%) |
Chi-Square |
|
Overall Employment Need Level (n = 755) |
275 |
(48%) |
154 |
(85%) |
75.51*** |
Ability |
|
|
|
|
|
Less than grade 8 |
71 |
(13%) |
47 |
(28%) |
19.79*** |
Less than grade 10 |
186 |
(35%) |
99 |
(59%) |
30.97*** |
No high school diploma |
314 |
(59%) |
146 |
(87%) |
44.37*** |
Finds learning difficult |
90 |
(17%) |
43 |
(26%) |
6.68 |
Learning disabilities |
58 |
(11%) |
14 |
(9%) |
0.73 |
Physical problems which interfere with learning |
20 |
(4%) |
11 |
(7%) |
2.45 |
Memory problems |
93 |
(17%) |
34 |
(20%) |
0.80 |
Concentration problems |
119 |
(22%) |
49 |
(30%) |
3.89 |
Problems with reading |
61 |
(11%) |
38 |
(23%) |
13.79*** |
Problems with writing |
64 |
(12%) |
40 |
(24%) |
14.68*** |
Problems with numeracy |
123 |
(23%) |
55 |
(33%) |
6.74 |
Difficulty comprehending instructions |
36 |
(7%) |
14 |
(8%) |
0.55 |
Lacks a skill area/trade/profession |
287 |
(53%) |
119 |
(71%) |
15.84*** |
Dissatisfied with skill area/trade/profession |
219 |
(41%) |
94 |
(57%) |
12.98*** |
Physical problems interfere with work |
96 |
(18%) |
37 |
(22%) |
1.47 |
Work Record |
|
|
|
|
|
No employment history |
77 |
(14%) |
50 |
(30%) |
20.61*** |
Unemployed at the time of arrest |
361 |
(67%) |
147 |
(88%) |
24.12*** |
Unemployed 90% or more |
214 |
(40%) |
113 |
(68%) |
40.35*** |
Unemployed 50% or more |
321 |
(60%) |
138 |
(83%) |
29.99*** |
Unstable job history |
307 |
(57%) |
139 |
(83%) |
36.00*** |
Often shows up late for work |
24 |
(5%) |
9 |
(5%) |
0.24 |
Poor attendance record |
34 |
(6%) |
12 |
(7%) |
0.14 |
Difficulty meeting workload requirements |
17 |
(3%) |
4 |
(2%) |
0.27 |
Lacks initiative |
45 |
(8%) |
28 |
(17%) |
9.48 |
Quit a job without another |
204 |
(38%) |
56 |
(34%) |
1.12 |
Been laid off from work |
129 |
(24%) |
53 |
(32%) |
4.12 |
Been fired from a job |
113 |
(21%) |
21 |
(13%) |
5.83 |
Rewards |
|
|
|
|
|
Salary has been insufficient |
197 |
(37%) |
58 |
(35%) |
0.15 |
Lack employment benefits |
243 |
(46%) |
73 |
(44%) |
0.18 |
Job lacks security |
210 |
(39%) |
58 |
(35%) |
1.03 |
Co-worker Relations |
|
|
|
|
|
Difficulty with co-workers |
15 |
(3%) |
5 |
(3%) |
a |
Supervisory Relations |
|
|
|
|
|
Difficulties with superiors |
29 |
(5%) |
10 |
(6%) |
0.08 |
Interventions |
|
|
|
|
|
Prior vocational assessments |
66 |
(12%) |
20 |
(12%) |
0.00 |
Participated in employment programs |
143 |
(27%) |
50 |
(30%) |
0.78 |
Completed an occupational development program |
59 |
(11%) |
17 |
(10%) |
0.06 |
Note : The Dynamic Factors Identification Analysis (DFIA) is conducted as part of the Offender Intake Assessment (OIA) implemented by Correctional Service of Canada. Data regarding the overall employment domain was available for 182 Aboriginal women and 573 non-Aboriginal women (some missing data was also evident with respect to offenders' race). The effective sample size for the individual items ranged from n = 690 to n = 705 depending on the amount of missing data for each indicator.
a) The expected cell counts were too small (less than 5) to conduct a valid chi-square test for this question.
*** p < .001 Due to the large number of chi-square tests to be conducted, a significance level of .001 was adopted to determine significance of the comparisons shown in the table above.
Appendix P: Number (Percentage) of Younger and Older Women Offenders (May 1 st , 2004) with Identified Needs in the Employment Domain from the Dynamic Factors Identification Analysis at Intake
Employment Domain |
Younger ( = 37 yrs) |
Older ( = 38 yrs) |
|
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
n |
(%) |
N |
(%) |
Chi-Square |
Overall Employment Need Level (n = 773) |
292 |
(65%) |
150 |
(47%) |
24.49*** |
Ability |
|
|
|
|
|
Less than grade 8 |
74 |
(17%) |
47 |
(17%) |
0.00 |
Less than grade 10 |
199 |
(45%) |
94 |
(33%) |
9.86 |
No high school diploma |
315 |
(72%) |
156 |
(56%) |
19.47*** |
Finds learning difficult |
89 |
(20%) |
47 |
(17%) |
1.42 |
Learning disabilities |
50 |
(12%) |
23 |
(8%) |
1.98 |
Physical problems which interfere with learning |
15 |
(3%) |
17 |
(6%) |
2.80 |
Memory problems |
87 |
(20%) |
41 |
(15%) |
3.18 |
Concentration problems |
119 |
(27%) |
52 |
(18%) |
7.40 |
Problems with reading |
74 |
(17%) |
29 |
(10%) |
6.03 |
Problems with writing |
76 |
(17%) |
30 |
(11%) |
5.98 |
Problems with numeracy |
123 |
(28%) |
58 |
(21%) |
5.00 |
Difficulty comprehending instructions |
37 |
(8%) |
17 |
(6%) |
1.34 |
Lacks a skill area/trade/profession |
300 |
(68%) |
117 |
(41%) |
50.82*** |
Dissatisfied with skill area/trade/profession |
230 |
(53%) |
92 |
(33%) |
28.36*** |
Physical problems interfere with work |
65 |
(15%) |
70 |
(25%) |
10.96*** |
Work Record |
|
|
|
|
|
No employment history |
97 |
(22%) |
32 |
(11%) |
13.55*** |
Unemployed at the time of arrest |
346 |
(79%) |
174 |
(61%) |
25.09*** |
Unemployed 90% or more |
238 |
(54%) |
98 |
(35%) |
26.44*** |
Unemployed 50% or more |
322 |
(74%) |
150 |
(53%) |
30.77*** |
Unstable job history |
328 |
(75%) |
131 |
(46%) |
59.32*** |
Often shows up late for work |
29 |
(7%) |
4 |
(1%) |
10.79 |
Poor attendance record |
35 |
(8%) |
12 |
(4%) |
4.11 |
Difficulty meeting workload requirements |
13 |
(3%) |
9 |
(3%) |
0.03 |
Lacks initiative |
56 |
(13%) |
20 |
(7%) |
6.06 |
Quit a job without another |
172 |
(40%) |
93 |
(33%) |
3.25 |
Been laid off from work |
107 |
(25%) |
79 |
(28%) |
1.01 |
Been fired from a job |
86 |
(20%) |
50 |
(18%) |
0.48 |
Rewards |
|
|
|
|
|
Salary has been insufficient |
163 |
(37%) |
98 |
(35%) |
0.51 |
Lack employment benefits |
208 |
(48%) |
116 |
(41%) |
2.76 |
Job lacks security |
177 |
(40%) |
102 |
(36%) |
1.14 |
Co-worker Relations |
|
|
|
|
|
Difficulty with co-workers |
14 |
(3%) |
7 |
(2%) |
0.31 |
Supervisory Relations |
|
|
|
|
|
Difficulties with superiors |
26 |
(6%) |
15 |
(5%) |
0.12 |
Interventions |
|
|
|
|
|
Prior vocational assessments |
57 |
(13%) |
33 |
(12%) |
0.26 |
Participated in employment programs |
129 |
(30%) |
68 |
(24%) |
2.35 |
Completed an occupational development program |
42 |
(10%) |
37 |
(13%) |
2.18 |
Note : The Dynamic Factors Identification Analysis (DFIA) is conducted as part of the Offender Intake Assessment (OIa). Data regarding the overall employment domain were available for 452 younger women and 321 older women. The effective sample size for the individual items ranged from n = 708 to n = 718, depending on the amount of missing data for each indicator.
*** p < .001 Due to the large number of chi-square tests to be conducted, a significance level of .001 was adopted to determine significance of the comparisons shown in the table above.
Appendix Q: Most Recent Job Prior to Incarceration Reported by Institutional and Community Women Offenders
|
Women's Most Recent Job Prior to Incarceration |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Incarcerated (n = 58) |
Community (n = 34) |
Sales and Service Occupations |
23 (40%) |
12 (35%) |
Restaurant/Food Industry (Cook/Service/Management) |
11 |
8 |
Retail/Sales/Telemarketer/Cashier |
8 |
1 |
Janitorial/Cleaning |
4 |
3 |
Heath Care Homeworker |
1 |
0 |
Child-Care |
1 |
0 |
Security |
0 |
1 ?? |
Business, Finance and Administration Occupations |
10 (17%) |
6 (18%) |
Administrative/Receptionist/Secretarial |
3 |
3 |
Data Entry/Inventory Work/Postal Employee |
3 |
1 |
Accounting/Payroll/Bookkeeper |
2 |
2 |
Customer Service |
2 |
0 |
Health Occupations |
2 (3%) |
3 (9%) |
Nurse |
1 |
2 |
Animal Health Technician |
1 |
0 |
Physiotherapy |
0 |
1 |
Social Science, Education, Government Service, Religion |
4 (7%) |
1 (3%) |
Social Worker |
1 |
0 |
Social Service Work (General) |
3 |
0 |
Teacher |
0 |
1 |
Processing, Manufacturing and Utilities |
3 (5%) |
2 (6%) |
Manufacturing/Line/Plant Worker |
3 |
2 |
Trades, Transport and Equipment Operators and Related |
2 (3%) |
2 (6%) |
Roofer |
1 |
0 |
Truck Driver |
1 |
2 |
Occupations in Art, Culture, Recreation and Sport |
3 (5%) |
1 (3%) |
Painter/Decorator |
1 |
0 |
Wood Worker |
1 |
0 |
Dancer |
1 |
1 |
Natural and Applied Sciences and Related Occupations |
1 (2%) |
1 (3%) |
Computer Technical Support |
1 |
0 |
Surveyor |
0 |
1 |
Occupations Unique to Primary Industry |
0 (0%) |
1 (3%) |
Greenhouse |
0 |
1 |
Other |
4 (7%) |
2 (6%) |
Labourer (Unspecified) |
1 |
0 |
Other |
3 |
2 |
Note : Total number within categories will not necessarily add up to the total for the category as some women listed more than one type of job within the overall National Occupational Classification categories that were used to summarize women's responses. Moreover, the total percentages for the overall categories may sum to more than 100% as some women listed more than one job prior to incarceration, in different overall job classification groups.
Appendix R: Percentage of Incarcerated Women Describing Institutional Employment Training Completed in the Institution and Interest in Future Training (n = 58)
|
Interested In |
Completed |
|---|---|---|
First Aid & CPR |
67% |
5% |
Computer Skills/Technological Studies |
62% |
5% |
Vocational Assessment (Interests & Abilities) |
55% |
0% |
Clerk (Inventory, Shipping and Receiving) |
50% |
0% |
Woodworker, Cabinetmaker, or Furniture Maker |
48% |
0% |
Landscaping/Horticulture |
47% |
0% |
Hairdressing/Esthetics |
47% |
3% |
Employability Skills or Socio-Occupational Integration Services (develop employability skills) |
45% |
5% |
Safe Start (safety in the workplace) |
43% |
0% |
Cooking or Cook's Helper |
41% |
0% |
WHMIS |
41% |
12% |
Welding or Welder's Helper Program |
40% |
0% |
Basics in Food Safety |
40% |
7% |
Vocational Carpentry |
38% |
2% |
Dental Assistant |
36% |
0% |
Accounting |
35% |
5% |
Forklift Operator |
35% |
0% |
Automotive Painter-Bodywork |
33% |
0% |
Maintenance Mechanic's Helper |
33% |
0% |
Library Clerk |
31% |
0% |
Automobile Service Clerk |
29% |
0% |
Industrial Design |
29% |
0% |
Printing |
28% |
0% |
Building Service Worker/Superintendent |
28% |
0% |
Machine Shop |
28% |
0% |
Butcher's Helper |
24% |
0% |
Construction Safety Computer Based Training or Chainsaw Safety |
24% |
3% |
Electronics |
24% |
0% |
Metalworking Machine Operator, Metal Painter-Coater |
24% |
0% |
Upholsterer's Helper |
21% |
0% |
Bricklayer-Mason |
21% |
0% |
Industrial Cleaning Program |
19% |
5% |
Plumbing |
17% |
0% |
Industrial Sewing Machine Operator or Mechanic's Helper |
17% |
0% |
Gas Engines |
16% |
0% |
Laundry and Dry-Cleaning Helper |
16% |
0% |
Textile/Tailor's Worker |
16% |
2% |
Industrial Products Assembler |
12% |
0% |
Sports Equipment Installation and Repair |
10% |
0% |
a Canine program |
----- |
3% |
a Education |
----- |
26% |
a) These categories were reported by women as types of training that they had received in the institution but they were not included in the list of training courses that women were presented with to determine their training interests.
Appendix S: Percentage of Incarcerated Women Describing Current Employment in the Institution and Interest in Future Employment in the Institution (n = 58.)
|
Interested in |
Currently Working |
|---|---|---|
Administration |
55% |
3% |
Care Giver |
53% |
0% |
Construction Worker |
50% |
0% |
Painter |
48% |
0% |
Cabinetmaker or Furniture Assembler |
47% |
0% |
Hairdressing/Esthetics |
45% |
2% |
Peer Counsellor |
43% |
3% |
Canteen Operator |
43% |
0% |
Graphic Designer |
41% |
0% |
Cook/Food Prep Worker |
40% |
16% |
Editor of a Publication |
40% |
2% |
Greenhouse-Horticulture |
40% |
2% |
Baker |
38% |
0% |
Beverage Person |
36% |
0% |
Elders assistant and Groundskeeper |
36% |
2% |
Library Assistant |
33% |
3% |
Metal Worker |
31% |
0% |
Groundskeeper |
29% |
5% |
Inmate Committee |
29% |
0% |
Printing Services |
29% |
0% |
Upholsterer |
28% |
0% |
Manufacturing |
28% |
0% |
Tailor/Textile Worker |
26% |
2% |
Farm Hand or Dairy Worker |
26% |
0% |
Recycling |
24% |
0% |
Cleaner |
22% |
16% |
Laundry |
21% |
0% |
Plumber or Plumber's Assistant |
17% |
0% |
Butcher |
16% |
0% |
Dishwasher |
16% |
0% |
Butchery (Abattoir) |
10% |
0% |
Furnace Maintenance |
10% |
0% |
a General Maintenance |
----- |
21% |
a Inventory/stores/ship & receive |
----- |
7% |
a Teacher/Tutor |
----- |
9% |
a Chaplain Assistant |
----- |
2% |
a CORCAN |
----- |
2% |
a) These categories were reported by women as types of jobs that they had in the institution but they were not included in the list of jobs that women were presented with to determine their employment interests.
Appendix T: Number (Percentage) of Women (Incarcerated Sample) Reporting Career Interests in Each of the Following Occupational Areas
|
Career Interests – Incarcerated Women Offenders (n = 58) |
|---|---|
Sales and Service Occupations |
26 (45%) |
Restaurant/Food Industry (Cook/Service/Management) |
14 |
Retail/Sales/Cashier |
9 |
Animal Care or Training |
6 |
Janitorial/Cleaning |
3 |
Hairstylist/Make-up Artist |
3 |
Child-Care/Work with Children |
2 |
Fire-Fighter |
1 |
Business, Finance and Administration Occupations |
16 (28%) |
Administrative/Clerical/Secretarial/Office Work |
12 |
Call Centre |
2 |
Data Entry/Inventory Work |
2 |
Marketing/Advertising |
1 |
Bookkeeping |
1 |
Trades, Transport and Equipment Operators and Related |
14 (24%) |
“Trades”/Construction/Carpentry/Welding |
10 |
Heavy Equipment Operators/Forklift Operators |
4 |
Mechanic/Machinist |
3 |
Delivery Driver |
1 |
Social Science, Education, Government Service, Religion |
11 (19%) |
Social Worker |
4 |
Counselling |
4 |
Social Service Work (Other) |
3 |
Teacher |
2 |
Occupations in Art, Culture, Recreation and Sport |
8 (14%) |
Designer/Interior Decorating/Graphics |
3 |
Entertainment Industry/Costume Design |
2 |
Journalist/Writer |
1 |
Photographer/Restoration |
2 |
Recreational Worker (Children) |
1 |
Health Occupations |
4 (7%) |
Nurse/Medical Field (General) |
3 |
Veterinarian |
1 |
Processing, Manufacturing and Utilities |
4 (7%) |
Plant Worker/Fabricator (Steel, Fish) |
2 |
Food Packing |
1 |
Sewing |
1 |
Natural and Applied Sciences and Related Occupations |
3 (5%) |
Conservation/Fisheries/Wildlife |
2 |
Drafting Technologists (AUTO-CAD) |
1 |
Occupations Unique to Primary Industry |
2 (3%) |
Groundskeeper |
1 |
Farming Equipment Operator |
1 |
Other |
17 (29%) |
Labourer (Unspecified) |
4 |
Computer-Related |
6 |
Entrepreneurship (Unspecified Business) |
2 |
Other |
5 |
Note : Total number within categories will not necessarily add up to the total for the category as many some women listed more than one type of job within the overall National Occupational Classification categories that were used to summarize women's responses. Moreover, the total percentages for the overall categories will sum to more than 100% as many women listed future career interests in more than one general category of work (e.g., employment interests in Sales/Service as well as Business/Finance/Administration).
Appendix U: Number of Women in the Community Sample with a Current Job or Searching for a Job in each of the Occupational Classifications
|
Employed: Current Job (n = 20) |
Unemployed & Searching for Job (n = 6) a |
|---|---|---|
Sales and Service Occupations |
7 (35%) |
4 (67%) |
Restaurant/Food Industry (Cook/Service/Management) |
4 |
1 |
Retail/Sales/Telemarketer/Cashier |
3 |
2 |
Janitorial/Cleaning |
0 |
1 |
Hairdressing |
0 |
1 |
Business, Finance and Administration Occupations |
6 (30%) |
1 (17%) |
Administrative/Receptionist/Secretarial |
4 |
1 |
Customer Service |
1 |
0 |
Telephone Operator |
1 |
0 |
Trades, Transport and Equipment Operators and Related |
2 (10%) |
1 (17%) |
Construction |
0 |
1 |
Automotive Industry |
1 |
0 |
Equipment Operator |
1 |
0 |
Social Science, Education, Government Service, Religion |
2 (10%) |
0 (0%) |
Social Service Work (General) |
2 |
0 |
Processing, Manufacturing and Utilities |
1 (5%) |
0 (0%) |
Seamstress |
1 |
0 |
Health Occupations |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Occupations in Art, Culture, Recreation and Sport |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Natural and Applied Sciences and Related Occupations |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Occupations Unique to Primary Industry |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
Other |
2 (10%) |
2 (33%) |
Labourer (Unspecified) |
0 |
1 |
“Computer Applications” |
0 |
1 |
Other |
2 |
0 |
a) Although six women noted that they were currently searching for a job, only four listed types of employment for which they were currently searching.
Note : Total percentages for the overall categories may sum to more than 100% as some women reported that they were searching for more than one type of job within or across different job classification groups.
Appendix V: Social Support for Employment Reported by Institution vs. Community, Younger vs. Older, and Aboriginal vs. Non-Aboriginal Women Offenders.
|
Affective Ties |
Resources/Models |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Mean (SD) |
df |
t-value |
Mean (SD) |
df |
t-value |
Institution |
2.72 (0.86) |
|
|
3.16 (0.49) |
|
|
Community |
3.31 (0.81) |
1, 86 |
-3.16** |
3.26 (0.43) |
1, 87 |
-1.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Younger |
2.71 (0.85) |
|
|
3.12 (0.49) |
|
|
Older |
3.31 (0.81) |
1, 85 |
-3.15** |
3.33 (0.43) |
1, 86 |
-1.94 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aboriginal |
2.59 (0.91) |
|
|
2.91 (0.49) |
|
|
Non-Aboriginal |
3.05 (0.84) |
1, 84 |
2.15 |
3.29 (0.43) |
1, 85 |
3.37** |
*** p < .01
Appendix W: ANOVA Summary Table for Incarcerated versus Community Women Offenders' Ratings of the Importance of Employment Programming versus Other Programming (n = 85).
Source |
df |
F |
Between Subjects |
|
|
Groups |
1 |
12.57*** |
Error |
83 |
|
Within Subjects |
|
|
Program Type |
1 |
33.24*** |
Groups*Program Type |
1 |
.50 |
Error |
83 |
|
*** p < .001
Appendix X: ANOVA Summary Table for Incarcerated versus Community Women Offenders' Perceptions of Their Own versus Staff Members' (Local and NHQ staff) Perceptions of the Importance of Employment Programming (n = 82).
Source |
df |
F |
Between Subjects |
|
|
Groups |
1 |
.49 |
Error |
80 |
|
Within Subjects |
|
|
Rater Importance |
2 |
6.41** |
Groups*Rater Importance |
2 |
5.84** |
Error |
79 |
|
** p < .01
Appendix Y: ANOVA Summary Table for Institutional Staff and Community Parole Officers Regarding Self-Perceived Importance of Employment Programming versus Perceptions of Others' Beliefs in the Importance of Employment Programming (n = 53).
Source |
df |
F |
Between Subjects |
|
|
Groups |
1 |
.19 |
Error |
51 |
|
Within Subjects |
|
|
Rater Importance |
3 |
6.40*** |
Groups*Rater Importance |
3 |
.59 |
Error |
49 |
|
*** p < .001
